code-review

A review workflow for code that has not been committed yet, was recently committed, or belongs to a pull request. It checks security, code quality, and ease of maintenance, then groups findings by seriousness.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review a file, group of files, uncommitted changes, a recent commit, or a GitHub pull request. It is intended for finding security risks and maintainability issues.
Why use it?
It provides a structured way to find problems before code is merged or released. Reviewing surrounding code helps avoid judging a change without its context.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/sjarmak/agent-workflows/code-review
Any agent
npx skills add sjarmak/agent-workflows --skill code-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sjarmak/agent-workflows

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 0 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,173 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00000 $0.01173
Opus 5 $0.00000 $0.00587
Sonnet 5 $0.00000 $0.00235
Haiku 4.5 $0.00000 $0.00117

Measured 2d ago against content hash cedf3962e377, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

skills/code-review/SKILL.md · 143 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 143 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Comprehensive code review of uncommitted or recently committed changes. Reviews for security, quality, and maintainability, then reports findings by severity.

Arguments

$ARGUMENTS — format: [file path | glob pattern | PR number | blank]

  • If a file path or glob is provided, scope the review to those files.
  • If a PR number is provided, review that pull request via gh pr diff.
  • If no argument is provided, review all uncommitted changes.

Parse Arguments

Extract:

  • scope: a file path, glob pattern, PR number (digits only), or empty

Phase 1: Gather Changes

  1. Uncommitted changes (default): run git diff --staged and git diff to capture all changes.
  2. File/glob scope: read the specified files and their diffs.
  3. PR scope: run gh pr diff <number> to get the full diff.
  4. If no changes are found, check git log --oneline -5 and offer to review the last commit.

For each changed file, also read surrounding code — don't review changes in isolation.

Phase 2: Review

Launch 3 parallel review agents, each focused on a different severity tier:

Agent 1: Security (CRITICAL)

Review ONLY for security issues. Flag these if found:

- Hardcoded credentials (API keys, passwords, tokens, connection strings)
- SQL injection (string concatenation in queries)
- XSS vulnerabilities (unescaped user input in HTML/JSX)
- Path traversal (user-controlled file paths without sanitization)
- CSRF vulnerabilities (state-changing endpoints without protection)
- Authentication bypasses (missing auth checks on protected routes)
- Exposed secrets in logs (logging tokens, passwords, PII)
- Insecure deserialization or command injection

For each issue, report: file path, line number, what's wrong, and how to fix it.
Only report issues you are >80% confident are real problems, not pre-existing issues.

Agent 2: Code Quality (HIGH)

Review for code quality issues. Flag these if found:

- Functions over 50 lines
- Files over 800 lines
- Nesting depth over 4 levels
- Missing error handling (unhandled rejections, empty catch blocks)
- Mutation patterns where immutable operations should be used
- Debug logging left in (console.log, print statements)
- Dead code (commented-out code, unused imports, unreachable branches)
- Missing tests for new code paths

Consolidate similar issues (e.g., "5 functions missing error handling" not 5 separate findings).
Only report issues in changed code. Skip stylistic preferences unless they violate project conventions.

Read the full file on GitHub · 143 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 143 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A cedf3962e377

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository sjarmak/agent-workflows (9 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,173 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

speckit.specify

Skill "speckit.specify" from caipe-io/ai-platform-engineering, covering user input, outline, quick guidelines, section requirements and for ai generation.

caipe-io/ai-platform-engineering · 0 tokens

release-docs

Generate a combined release blog post for ai-platform-engineering. Produces a single docs/releases/YYYY-MM-DD-release-X-Y-Z.md file containing release notes and the upgrade guide (migration guide) inline. Use when cutting a release, when a user asks "what changed in 0.4.x", or when upgrading their values.yaml to a new…

caipe-io/ai-platform-engineering · 76 tokens

speckit.clarify

Skill "speckit.clarify" from caipe-io/ai-platform-engineering, covering user input and outline.

caipe-io/ai-platform-engineering · 0 tokens

local-integration-testing

Run end-to-end integration tests with all 15 agents and supervisor in local Docker Compose dev environment. Validates agent discovery, multi-agent routing, checkpoint persistence, and cross-agent follow-up conversations.

caipe-io/ai-platform-engineering · 44 tokens

update-docs

Audit and update all documentation moving parts for ai-platform-engineering. Checks release blog posts, features page, agent docs, homepage version strings, Docusaurus version config, and sidebar completeness. Fixes what is stale and reports what needs manual attention. Use after cutting a release, adding a new agent…

caipe-io/ai-platform-engineering · 70 tokens

docker-compose-first-install

Validate and repair the OSS first-install Docker Compose path. Use when editing docker-compose.yaml, docker-compose.dev.yaml, .env.example, release image tags, Compose profiles, Keycloak/OpenFGA/RAG defaults, or first-launch UI behavior for local all-in-one installs.

caipe-io/ai-platform-engineering · 60 tokens