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 skills add soulcodex/agentic --skill code-review-architecturegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/soulcodex/agenticWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/soulcodex/agentic/code-review-architecture)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/soulcodex/agentic/code-review-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/soulcodex/agentic/code-review-architecture/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/soulcodex/agentic/code-review-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/soulcodex/agentic/code-review-architecture.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00063 | $0.00812 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00325 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00162 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00081 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-architecture 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 1mo 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 — 106 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review — Architecture
Apply architecture-focused review using the checklist in this skill directory.
Step 0 — Load Project Map
Check for .agentic/project-map.md (this is essential for architecture review):
- If present: read it. Use the layer structure, key modules table, and non-obvious conventions as the core concern. Architecture reviews depend heavily on knowing which directories map to which layers.
- If absent: abort this specialized review and suggest running the
project-mapskill first.
Step 1 — Load Checklist
Read checklist.md in this skill directory and apply every item to the codebase.
Step 2 — Determine Scope
- If the user specifies files, review those.
- Otherwise review the current diff:
git diff HEADor staged changes. - Do not review files outside stated scope.
Step 3 — Analyze with Architecture-specific Lenses
Work through the checklist systematically. For each issue found, note:
- File path and line number
- Risk level:
critical/high/medium/low - Description of the issue
- Why it matters
- Verifiable source reference when the finding is non-obvious
Architecture concerns to focus on:
- Hexagonal/Clean architecture boundary violations
- Anemic domain model (DDD anti-pattern)
- God Aggregate violations
- CQRS command/query leakage
- Microservice coupling and shared databases
For aggregate lifecycle violations or async state machine bugs that are too complex for prose, emit a Mermaid stateDiagram-v2 diagram.
Step 4 — Write the Review
Output the review in this exact format:
## Code Review — Architecture
### What Works Well
- [At least one specific positive observation with file reference]
### Findings
#### Critical
- `path/to/domain/order.go:42` [critical] Description. Why it must change. *Source: [Hexagonal Architecture — Alistair Cockburn](https://alistair.cockburn.us/hexagonal-architecture/)*
#### High
- `path/to/application/service.go:18` [high] Description. Why it matters. *Source: ...*
#### Medium
- `path/to/infrastructure/repository.go:7` [medium] Description.
#### Low
- `path/to/pkg/foo.go:5` [low] Minor note.
### Suggested Improvements
[Concrete alternatives and solutions for the most impactful findings]
### Summary
[One paragraph: overall quality, main risks, merge recommendation]
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 106 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A 57bb3cf0916c
code-review-architecture is a skill published in the GitHub repository soulcodex/agentic (10 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 812 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
plugin-review
Review plugin quality with tiered checks and dependency scoping. Use for PR and pre-release audits.
improve-codebase-architecture
Review module boundaries, interface depth and high-leverage refactors with evidence.
hatch3r-enhancability-verify
Enhancability verification gate before commit/release — feature-flag adoption on behavior changes, config externalization, semver-versioned APIs, forward-compat headers, extension-point definition, startup config validation.
hatch3r-maintainability-verify
Maintainability verification gate before commit/release — jscpd duplication index, pattern reuse ratio, cyclomatic complexity, expand-contract migrations, API breaking-change discipline, ADR presence.
critical-review
Radical-honesty architectural review — questions code, methodology, design, and operational fitness.
code-reviewer
A code-review workflow written in Chinese that checks software changes for correctness, security, performance, and maintainability. It also defines a report format for critical issues and suggestions.