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 VersoXBT/claude-initial-setup --skill review-checklistgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/VersoXBT/claude-initial-setupWrote 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/versoxbt/claude-initial-setup/review-checklist)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/versoxbt/claude-initial-setup/review-checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/versoxbt/claude-initial-setup/review-checklist/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/versoxbt/claude-initial-setup/review-checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/versoxbt/claude-initial-setup/review-checklist.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00057 | $0.01565 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00783 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00313 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00156 |
Grade A, and why
review-checklist 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 8d 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 — 225 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Checklist
A systematic approach to code review with categorized checks and severity levels. Focus on issues that matter most: correctness, security, and maintainability. Provide constructive, actionable feedback.
When to Use
- Reviewing a pull request or code changes
- Asking Claude to review code you wrote
- Setting up code review standards for a team
- Learning what to look for in code reviews
- Writing review comments on PRs
Core Patterns
Severity Levels
Classify every finding by severity to prioritize fixes.
CRITICAL - Must fix before merge. Security vulnerabilities, data loss risks,
broken functionality, production crashes.
HIGH - Should fix before merge. Bugs, race conditions, missing error handling,
performance issues with measurable impact.
MEDIUM - Fix soon, can merge with follow-up ticket. Code smells, missing tests
for edge cases, suboptimal patterns, unclear naming.
LOW - Optional improvement. Style preferences, minor readability tweaks,
documentation suggestions.
Correctness Checks
The most important category. Does the code do what it claims?
// CHECK: Off-by-one errors
// WRONG
for (let i = 0; i <= items.length; i++) { // Off-by-one: should be <
process(items[i]); // items[items.length] is undefined
}
// CHECK: Null/undefined handling
// WRONG
function getDisplayName(user: User): string {
return user.profile.displayName; // What if profile is null?
}
// CORRECT
function getDisplayName(user: User): string {
return user.profile?.displayName ?? user.email;
}
// CHECK: Async error handling
// WRONG
async function fetchData() {
const response = await fetch('/api/data'); // Unhandled rejection
return response.json();
}
// CORRECT
async function fetchData() {
const response = await fetch('/api/data');
if (!response.ok) {
throw new Error(`Fetch failed: ${response.status} ${response.statusText}`);
}
return response.json();
}
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 225 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A 5a1815fac3bf
review-checklist is a skill published in the GitHub repository VersoXBT/claude-initial-setup (4 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 1,565 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
review
Use in the Review phase before claiming any Java/Spring task is complete, fixed, or passing. Spawns the auditor subagents that check the implementation against every applicable skill, rule, and memory item, runs the test suite for fresh evidence, and re-spawns for at most two fix rounds before reporting what survives.…
spawn-reviewers
Spawn and collect the reviewer fleet at stage20spawnreviewers. Consumes spawn.json.spec (the authoritative spawn spec from derive-spawn-spec / derive-static-spec), resolves GRAPHPROJECT, builds per-agent prompts from the per-agent template + role suffixes (Bug Hunter A/B, Unified Auditor, Domain Critics, Impact…
verify-findings
Dispatch and collect the finding-verifier fleet at stage23verifyfindings (PLN-722). Reads verifymanifest.json (written by stage22bverifyprepare), spawns one falsify-oriented verifier Task per toverify[] entry with mode-specific Task scheduling (GitHub mode dispatches verifiers synchronously; local mode uses parallel…
qa-refactoring
Safe refactoring with behavior preservation. Use when reducing technical debt, planning codemods, applying strangler migrations, or tightening CI guardrails around risky changes.
critic-cache
Check if critic reviews are still valid before re-running Phase 2.5 critics. Compares plan.json + critic-gates.json content hash against stored hash from last critic run. Triggers on: entering Phase 2.5, checking critic cache, before launching critics. Returns CRITICCACHEHIT to skip critics or CRITICCACHEMISS to…
code-review
Perform thorough code reviews, identify bugs, suggest improvements, and explain code quality issues.