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 spencerpauly/awesome-cursor-skills --skill parallel-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/spencerpauly/awesome-cursor-skillsWrote 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/spencerpauly/awesome-cursor-skills/parallel-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/spencerpauly/awesome-cursor-skills/parallel-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/spencerpauly/awesome-cursor-skills/parallel-code-review/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/spencerpauly/awesome-cursor-skills/parallel-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/spencerpauly/awesome-cursor-skills/parallel-code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk warn
- 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 | $0.00047 | $0.00706 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00353 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00141 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00071 |
Grade A, and why
parallel-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 9d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- parallel-code-review — 92% identical, 2 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 105 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Parallel Code Review
Use Cursor’s Task tool to run four explore (read-only) subagents at once. Each subagent only reads code and produces findings for one dimension. The main agent merges results into a single prioritized review — something only a multi-agent setup does efficiently.
When to use
- Large diffs or refactors where a single pass misses categories.
- Security-sensitive changes (auth, payments, parsing untrusted input).
- Performance-sensitive paths (hot loops, N+1 queries, bundle entry points).
Workflow
1. Scope the change set
Prefer a concrete list of files for reviewers:
git diff --name-only origin/main...HEAD
Or paste the PR link and let the main agent list changed files from the branch.
2. Launch four parallel subagents
Send one message with four Task invocations, each subagent_type: "explore" and readonly: true, with prompts like:
Security
Read-only review: SECURITY
Changed files:
<list>
Focus: injection (SQL, shell, XSS), authZ/authN gaps, secrets in code, unsafe deserialization, path traversal, SSRF, IDOR, dependency CVEs mentioned in diff.
Output:
- Critical / High / Medium / Low findings
- File:line and short fix recommendation
- "No issues" if nothing material
Performance
Read-only review: PERFORMANCE
Changed files:
<list>
Focus: N+1 queries, missing indexes, accidental O(n²) loops, bundle size impact, unnecessary re-renders, sync I/O on hot paths, unbounded caches.
Output: same severity + location format as above.
Correctness
Read-only review: CORRECTNESS
Changed files:
<list>
Focus: logic bugs, off-by-one, wrong edge cases, race conditions, error handling gaps, breaking API changes, test gaps for new behavior.
Output: same format.
Readability / maintainability
Read-only review: READABILITY
Changed files:
<list>
Focus: naming, duplication, abstraction boundaries, file size, unclear control flow, missing types/docs where they would prevent bugs.
Output: same format; prefer suggestions over nitpicks.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 105 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A f6702378872b
parallel-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository spencerpauly/awesome-cursor-skills (765 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed CC0-1.0. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 706 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…