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.
npx agentmods add skills/skywalkercyt/mp-implement/requesting-code-reviewnpx skills add skywalkercyt/mp-implement --skill requesting-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/skywalkercyt/mp-implementWhat 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.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5 | $0.00027 | $0.00538 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00269 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00108 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00054 |
Grade A, and why
requesting-code-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 49 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Requesting Code Review
Adapted skill — discipline originating in Superpowers v5.1.0 (MIT, Jesse Vincent), rewritten in mattpocock-skills style. Drives the independent review in
/mp-implement-issuestep 8 and the code-quality reviewer in/mp-implementPhase 3 (viasubagent-driven-development).
An independent reviewer checks the work before merge — self-review doesn't count. Review early, review often: after each task or slice, and always before merge to main.
The reviewer is a subagent with fresh context, so it gets a crafted brief, not your session history. Fresh eyes on the work product are what make the review independent; your reasoning so far is noise to it.
Fix the range first
BASE_SHA=$(git merge-base origin/main HEAD) # the slice's branch point
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
Confirm the base resolves (git rev-parse $BASE_SHA) and the three-dot diff (git diff $BASE_SHA...$HEAD_SHA) is non-empty before dispatching. A bad ref or empty diff fails here, not inside the subagent.
Dispatch the reviewer
Spawn a subagent with this brief filled in:
You are reviewing a change before merge. Work from this brief and the repo only.
## What was built
{DESCRIPTION}
## Requirements
{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS — issue body, acceptance criteria, or plan file}
## Diff under review
git diff {BASE_SHA}...{HEAD_SHA} (commits: git log {BASE_SHA}..{HEAD_SHA} --oneline)
Report findings as Critical (must fix) / Important (fix before proceeding) /
Minor (later), each with file:line, why it matters, and the fix. Severity is
actual, not diplomatic. End with a verdict: ready to merge, or what changes first.
Split big reviews into axes
A review can split into independent axes (e.g. Standards vs Spec) as parallel subagents, so neither axis pollutes the other. /mp-implement-issue step 8 does exactly this and carries its own inlined briefs — there, follow step 8 instead of the template above.
Act on the findings
What to do with the Critical / Important / Minor findings — evaluate each technically, fix, or push back with evidence — is governed by receiving-code-review.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 49 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 689f0e6434d6
requesting-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository skywalkercyt/mp-implement (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 538 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
reversi-master
One-click install + model switch:Claude Code,Codex CLI (OpenAI), Grok Build (xAI), DeepSeek Harness, Kimi Code (Moonshot) ,Qwen Code,Aider,OpenCode,MiMo Code (Xiaomi),ZCode (Z.AI),OpenClaw,Pi,OpenScience,Vibe-Trading,Claude Desktop (3P profile),ChatGPT desktop,OpenCode Desktop.
Trash Talk
AI becomes provocative and mocks the opponent during gameplay.
game-art-direction
Direct game art and creative vision. Turn GAMEDESIGN into a production-level ARTDIRECTION defining a recognizable visual style, camera and composition, world and character grammar, functional colour/light/material, HUD feedback, motion and transition specs, audio direction, and a signature moment for every screen and…
game-build
Build a risk-matched whitebox or the approved production game for its target runtime. Turn GAMEDESIGN, and ARTDIRECTION when production begins, into a minimal BUILDBRIEF and a runnable candidate that can be iterated with replayable evidence. Use for prototype the riskiest design question, implement the approved game…
novel-game-analyze
Deconstruct a novel for game adaptation. Compress a raw novel, deconstruction library, or writing project into a SOURCEBIBLE with cited textual evidence, extracting world rules, player verbs, spaces, character will, systems, and visual anchors — without inventing a genre yet. Use for gameable book analysis, analyze a…
novel-to-game
Turn a novel into a fully playable game on the selected target platform. Orchestrates the whole adaptation pipeline — requirements intake, gameable deconstruction, concept selection, world and visual design, target-runtime build, and evidence-based QA — for a novel in any language. Use for novel to game, story to…