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/valpere/chorus/parallel-reviewnpx skills add valpere/chorus --skill parallel-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/valpere/chorusWrote 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/valpere/chorus/parallel-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/valpere/chorus/parallel-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/valpere/chorus/parallel-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 5.1 | $0.00069 | $0.00466 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00233 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00093 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00047 |
Grade A, and why
chorus-parallel-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 6d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
Chorus: Parallel Code Review
When to use
- User wants code reviewed from multiple angles simultaneously
- User says "parallel review", "all agents review", "chorus review"
Your role
You review for SCOPE AND SIMPLICITY: unnecessary complexity, changes exceeding the stated goal, simpler alternatives.
Invocation
git diff HEAD > /tmp/chorus_diff.txt
claude --print "Review for CORRECTNESS AND SECURITY. Numbered findings.\n\n$(cat /tmp/chorus_diff.txt)" --dangerously-skip-permissions &
CLAUDE_PID=$!
gemini --prompt "Review for EDGE CASES AND ROBUSTNESS. Numbered findings.\n\n$(cat /tmp/chorus_diff.txt)" --yolo --output-format text &
GEMINI_PID=$!
agent -p --force "Review for CODEBASE INTEGRATION. Numbered findings.\n\n$(cat /tmp/chorus_diff.txt)" &
CURSOR_PID=$!
kilo run --auto "Review for MAINTAINABILITY. Numbered findings.\n\n$(cat /tmp/chorus_diff.txt)" &
KILO_PID=$!
wait $CLAUDE_PID $GEMINI_PID $CURSOR_PID $KILO_PID
Graceful degradation: Check each agent with command -v <binary> before spawning. Skip missing agents and warn the user. Proceed as long as at least 2 agents (including yourself) are available.
Output handling
Synthesize all available reviews (up to four agents + your scope review):
## Parallel Review Summary
**Critical findings** (2+ agents): …
**Verdict**: <proceed / needs revision>
Review-only — do not apply patches.
Known limitation
Codex sandbox limits access to the current working directory. Reviews of files outside this scope will be incomplete.
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 First seen · 54 lines · 69 tokens per session scan A 557e2aa1ab7c
chorus-parallel-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository valpere/chorus (10 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 69 tokens to every session and 466 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
dead-code-cleanup
Identifies and removes dead/orphaned code, tests, and Storybook stories — including trivial tests that check only obvious behavior or rare edge cases with no real value. Always validates that code is truly unused before deleting anything. Trigger on: "remove dead code", "clean up unused files", "delete orphaned…
comment-reaper
Finds and removes unnecessary code comments - the ones that restate the code, cite an issue number, narrate refactor history, or wrap a one-line function in six lines of JSDoc. Sorts every find into auto-fix, propose, or never-touch, so the WHY comments survive the sweep. Trigger on: "comment reaper", "reap comments"…
code-health-audit
Kicks off a recurring code-health audit — the "embarrassing code" / overengineering sweep that turns vague tech-debt anxiety into a short list of measurable, validated simplifications to ship. Bakes in the pre-flight discipline (sync the correct base branch, confirm the active worktree and its dev server, list files…
pr-review-fix-pipeline
Autonomous PR review that also applies fixes for non-controversial issues — combines review, fix, test, and commit into a single pipeline. Unlike a read-only review, this writes code. Only use on feature branches where you're comfortable with automatic edits. Trigger on: "review and fix PR", "auto-fix the PR", "clean…
abstraction-finder
Scans a codebase or a named area for recurring patterns that could be extracted into shared, general-purpose code, and proposes the smallest form for each — helper, service, base class, template, or util — with the exact call sites it would replace. The inverse of a conformance check: it discovers duplication worth…
band-aid-finder
Scans a change or codebase area for band-aid fixes that suppress a symptom instead of resolving the underlying cause, traces each to its actual root cause, and proposes the fix that addresses it. Distinguishes a band-aid from a deliberate, documented mitigation (incident hotfix, third-party defect…