A code-review skill for finding bugs, security gaps, unnecessary code, poor design choices, and performance problems. It can examine individual files or the architecture of a whole project.

Use it to refactor code, remove duplication, simplify complex areas, improve maintainability, assess architecture, or investigate performance issues.

It catches problems that ordinary tests may not cover and makes review findings precise by pointing to the relevant file and line.

ds-review — Skill for Claude Code and Codex by sungurerdim

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.

Any agent

npx skills add sungurerdim/dev-skills --skill ds-review

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sungurerdim/dev-skills

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

README.md

[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sungurerdim/dev-skills/ds-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/sungurerdim/dev-skills/ds-review)

Your own site

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sungurerdim/dev-skills/ds-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sungurerdim/dev-skills/ds-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.

Your own site · 80×15

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sungurerdim/dev-skills/ds-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sungurerdim/dev-skills/ds-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>

Per session 26 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.

When invoked 6,377 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.

Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.

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.

Model	Per session	Once invoked
Fable 5.1	$0.00026	$0.06377
Opus 5	$0.00013	$0.03188
Sonnet 5	$0.00005	$0.01275
Haiku 4.5	$0.00003	$0.00638

Measured 6d ago against content hash cf6dfaeb15e4, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-09, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

ds-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 6d 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.

ds-review/SKILL.md · 290 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 290 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

/ds-review

Code review catches what tests miss — security holes, dead code, wrong abstractions, and performance traps in plain sight. Skill scans for all of them with file:line precision.

Code Improvement — tactical fixes and strategic architecture alignment in one skill.

Completion Evidence — applies to every phase: Report done/OK only with the machine-checkable evidence the gates name — the exact command run and its observed output (or file:line diff). Missing evidence → report INCOMPLETE plus what is missing. Self-assessment is never evidence. (This band repeats at file end by design — both copies are normative.)

Triggers

User runs /ds-review
User asks to refactor, improve, or clean up code
User asks about code quality, complexity, or architecture
User asks to reduce duplication, fix patterns, improve maintainability

Four modes, each a flag in Arguments below: --tactical / --strategic / --perf / --meta-quality.

Triggers — INVOKE / DON'T INVOKE

INVOKE	DON'T INVOKE
"improve code quality (tactical)", "review my architecture (strategic)"	"format and lint only" (→ ds-fix)
"deep performance profiling"	"set up perf budget + CI gate" (→ ds-launch --perf-budget)
"principle-based audit (SSOT / DRY / KISS / SoC)"	"score overall project health" (→ ds-blueprint)
"reduce duplication, improve maintainability"	"remove dead code / orphan files" (→ ds-simplify)

Contract

Dimensions: B1 (code quality), D1 (performance), D2 (resource economy), D9 (API contract breakage) Framework alignment (advisory): ISO/IEC 25010 (B1), Google SRE PRR + Well-Architected Perf Efficiency (D1), Semantic Versioning (D9).

Every fix cites file:line with before/after — no blind modifications. Modifies only lines the finding requires; no scope creep.
Standalone. Uses blueprint profile or ds/audit/findings.md when available, own analysis when absent.
Full accounting enforced: every finding and planned check ends in an explicit disposition (fixed / skipped + reason / only you can do); summary totals balance.
Pre-existing / out-of-scope errors detected during work are NOT skipped — fixed inline or escalated with concrete blocker.
State-exempt: fixes land in the working tree/commits as applied — git is the durable record; re-run re-verifies remaining findings.

Read the full file on GitHub · 290 lines

Files

What ships with it

11 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.

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.

6d ago Changed · -45 lines cf6dfaeb15e4
9d ago First seen · 335 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A 2dfa6e9b30ef

Subscribe to this mod's changes

ds-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository sungurerdim/dev-skills (1 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 6,377 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.

Claude Code Code review ai-agent ai-coding ai-skills code-quality developer-tools

ring:adopting-lib-commons-huma-wrapper

Adopting the lib-commons/v5 shared Huma (OAS 3.1) OpenAPI wrapper + RFC 9457 problem model (commons/net/http/{openapi,problem}) in a Lerian Go service: wire openapi.New/ServeSpec + problem.Install (central >=500 scrub) on BOTH runtime and spec-gen paths, the per-rail problem.MapError flex seam, and rename-only spec…

LerianStudio/ring · 142 tokens

ring:committing-changes

Commit changes with scope allowlist enforcement, atomic grouping, GPG-signed conventional commits, and trailer management. Detects the repo's PR-validation scope policy before proposing any message. Use when the user asks to commit or has changes ready to record. Skip when the working tree is clean or the user wants…

LerianStudio/ring · 74 tokens

ring:searching-code

Forensic code search and analysis with optional Chain of Draft (CoD) ultra-concise mode. Five-phase methodology (clarification, planning, execution, analysis, synthesis) with severity assessment. Use for targeted investigation of specific patterns, bugs, or vulnerabilities. Skip for broad architecture mapping (use…

LerianStudio/ring · 74 tokens

ring:writing-plans

Writing a rolling-wave phased implementation plan from a spec before coding: a phase-epic-task hierarchy where Phase 1 is detailed into dispatch-ready tasks and later phases stay epic-level for elaboration during execution. Use when a multi-file feature needs decomposition; runs after ring:exploring-codebases or…

LerianStudio/ring · 94 tokens

ring:exploring-codebases

Exploring a codebase across phases: scopes the target, detects architecture, components, and layers, deep-dives each discovered perspective, then synthesizes findings into actionable guidance with file:line evidence. Use to understand how a feature or system works before planning changes, or to orient on an unfamiliar…

LerianStudio/ring · 91 tokens

ring:opening-pull-requests

Open a GitHub Pull Request with automatic base branch detection, scope allowlist enforcement, PR template filling, and post-create base verification. Replaces ring:generating-pr-descriptions. Use after pushing a branch when ready to open a PR. Skip if the branch is not yet pushed or there are uncommitted changes …

LerianStudio/ring · 83 tokens