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/threat-vector-security/guardian-agent/code-reviewnpx skills add Threat-Vector-Security/guardian-agent --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Threat-Vector-Security/guardian-agentWrote 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/threat-vector-security/guardian-agent/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/threat-vector-security/guardian-agent/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/threat-vector-security/guardian-agent/code-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>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 | $0.00035 | $0.00715 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00358 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00143 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
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 3d 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 — 68 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
Review changes against correctness, readability, architecture, security, performance, and verification quality. A review is not a style pass and it is not approval theater.
Process
- Understand the intent before judging the diff.
- What behavior is changing?
- What plan, task, or acceptance gate is this supposed to satisfy?
- Read the proof surface first.
- Check tests, harnesses, build claims, and any other evidence before trusting the implementation story.
- Review the implementation across five axes:
- correctness and regressions
- readability and simplicity
- architecture and boundary fit
- security and trust-boundary handling
- performance and scalability risk
- Anchor findings to the real change.
- Use
code_git_diffto review the actual diff. - Use
code_symbol_searchor targeted file reads to confirm surrounding behavior before concluding.
- Use
- Label the finding severity so the author knows what is required.
Critical:blocks merge- no prefix means required change
Optional:orConsider:means worthwhile but not requiredFYI:is informational only
- Call out reviewability problems too.
- If the change is too large, mixed, or weakly verified, say so directly.
- Treat weakened tests, narrowed proof surfaces, and dead-code leftovers as real findings.
Output structure:
- Findings with file paths and concrete risk.
- Open questions or assumptions.
- Brief summary only after the findings list.
Review Axes
- Correctness: behavior, edge cases, state transitions, and regression risk
- Readability: control flow, naming, avoidable complexity, and premature abstraction
- Architecture: module boundaries, consistency with existing patterns, and coupling
- Security: input validation, authz/authn, trust boundaries, secrets, and external data handling
- Performance: N+1 patterns, unbounded work, avoidable sync paths, and hot-path allocations
Reviewability Rules
- Prefer small, coherent changes. If the diff is too large to review safely, call that out instead of pretending confidence.
- Separate refactors from behavior changes when the diff mixes both.
- Review tests as the proof of intent, not as an afterthought.
- If refactoring leaves likely orphaned code behind, list it explicitly and ask before deleting uncertain leftovers.
What ships with it
3 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.
- 3d ago First seen · 68 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A a649b1ed672f
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Threat-Vector-Security/guardian-agent (11 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 715 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
orloj-generator
Interactive scaffold generator for Orloj multi-agent systems. Use this skill whenever someone wants to create, set up, scaffold, bootstrap, or generate an Orloj agent system, pipeline, swarm, or hierarchy. Also trigger when users mention "orlojctl init", ask how to get started with Orloj, want to build a multi-agent…
agentfootprint
Use when building AI agents with agentfootprint — LLMCall, Agent, skills, RAG, memory, control flow, Swarm concepts, mock/anthropic/openai/ollama providers, tools, recorders, resilience, and streaming. Also use when someone asks how agentfootprint works or wants to understand the framework.
billing
Use for refunds, disputed charges, invoices and any billing question.
shipping
Use for delivery estimates, lost parcels and address changes.
agentfootprint
Use when building AI agents with agentfootprint — LLMCall, Agent, skills, RAG, memory, control flow, Swarm concepts, mock/anthropic/openai/ollama providers, tools, recorders, resilience, and streaming. Also use when someone asks how agentfootprint works or wants to understand the framework.
titanclip
Interact with the TitanClip control plane API to manage tasks, coordinate with other agents, and follow company governance. Use when you need to check assignments, update task status, delegate work, post comments, set up or manage routines (recurring scheduled tasks), or call any TitanClip API endpoint. Do NOT use for…