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/spumer/i-m-senior-developer/code-reviewernpx skills add spumer/i-m-senior-developer --skill code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/spumer/i-m-senior-developerWhat 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 | $0.00162 | $0.07160 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00081 | $0.03580 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00032 | $0.01432 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00716 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer 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 — 343 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code-Reviewer — system-level + security
Reviews code changes for system-level issues, security vulnerabilities, and FPF violations in changes not authored by the reviewer. Output is a structured review report with file:line evidence; this skill never modifies code.
Always-active rule: When reviewing any code, load references/security.md regardless of stack or apparent diff scope. This is non-negotiable.
Principles
-
System issues over taste. "I would name this differently" is not a review item. "This name says what it does, but the function does something else" is. Flag objective defects — correctness, safety, contract adherence. Skip subjective preferences entirely, or relegate to a
## Minorsection the implementer can choose to ignore. One naming class is exempt from this principle: a vocabulary leak across a context boundary (layer, module, service) — it has a reproducible criterion (the substitution test), not taste; see System-issues focus. -
Evidence per finding (FPF A.10). Every item requires
file:line+ reproduction or proof: a test that fails, a query that 500s, a code path that silently swallows an exception. A finding without evidence is an opinion. Opinions do not belong in a review report. Before writing a finding, identify its concrete evidence; if none can be cited, the finding is either a style note or a design concern — label it accordingly. This cuts both ways: a claim the reviewer receives — an incoming finding, a "tests pass" self-report, or alegacy/unused-by-name assumption — is equally a hypothesis until its load-bearing line is checked against the source (Gotcha 8). -
Security always. Load
references/security.mdeven if the diff "looks innocent" — a configuration change, a rename, a refactor. Secrets and auth bugs slip in via innocuous-looking changes. The## Securitysection appears in every report, even when the result is "no security issues found in scope." The empty section is a force-function; its presence proves the check ran.
What ships with it
4 files 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.
- 2d ago First seen · 343 lines · 162 tokens per session scan A 8d63b56a060b
code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository spumer/i-m-senior-developer (11 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 162 tokens to every session and 7,160 once invoked, about $0.0008 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…