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/wardawgmalvicious/agent-config/code-reviewnpx skills add wardawgmalvicious/agent-config --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wardawgmalvicious/agent-configWrote 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/wardawgmalvicious/agent-config/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/wardawgmalvicious/agent-config/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wardawgmalvicious/agent-config/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 | $0.00061 | $0.01538 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00769 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00308 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00154 |
Grade A, and why
code-review scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 today.
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.
Asks for rootlowPrivilege escalation
A mod that escalates privileges can change anything on the machine, not only the project.
- Overly broad permissions: `chmod 777`, `*` in IAM/RBAC, public storage containers Downgraded: this mod is about security review, or the phrase is quoted, so it is likely naming the pattern rather than instructing it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 118 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code review
Surface findings on code quality across correctness, security, scaling, error handling, naming/style, and maintainability. Read-only — never modify code. Report findings; the user decides what to change.
Best invoked via /code-review for strict read-only enforcement. Natural-language invocation works for the audit pass, but adversarial follow-ups ("fix this") are not reliably refused under NL — slash command is the recommended path.
1. Determine review target
Pick the first that applies:
- User specified a target (file path, function name, branch/ref, "the changes I just made") — use that.
- In a git repo with uncommitted changes — run
git statusthengit diff(andgit diff --staged) to scope the review to working-tree changes. - In a git repo, clean tree, on a feature branch — diff against the merge base:
git diff $(git merge-base HEAD main)...HEAD(substitutemasterif that's the default). - None of the above — ask the user what to review. Do not guess.
For repo-wide audits the user explicitly requests, narrow by language or directory rather than scanning everything.
2. Review checklist
Apply in priority order. Stop at the first category if a finding blocks meaningful review further down (e.g. unrunnable code → don't bother with style).
Correctness
- Logic errors: off-by-one, inverted boolean, wrong operator
- Null / empty / missing-key handling — does it crash or silently produce wrong output?
- Race conditions, concurrent mutation of shared state
- Integer overflow, float comparison without tolerance, timezone-naive datetimes
- Loop invariants that don't hold on first or last iteration
- Return paths that don't return (implicit
None, missingelse)
Security
- Hardcoded secrets, API keys, connection strings, tokens
- Unparameterized SQL — f-strings,
.format(), or+concatenation building queries - Unsafe deserialization:
pickle.loads,yaml.load(withoutSafeLoader),eval,exec,compileon untrusted input - Path traversal: user input fed into
open(),Path(), file I/O without validation - Overly broad permissions:
chmod 777,*in IAM/RBAC, public storage containers - Subprocess with
shell=Trueand string-interpolated arguments - TLS verification disabled (
verify=False,InsecureRequestWarningsuppressed)
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.
- today Changed · +2 lines b0e40c829da6
- 4d ago First seen · 116 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A 3c5faf2227b9
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository wardawgmalvicious/agent-config (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 1,538 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (asks for root). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
llm-app-patterns
Production-ready patterns for building LLM applications. Covers RAG pipelines, agent architectures, prompt IDEs, and LLMOps monitoring. Use when designing AI applications, implementing RAG, building agents, or setting up LLM observability.
qa-test-planner
Generate comprehensive test plans, manual test cases, regression test suites, and bug reports for QA engineers. Includes Figma MCP integration for design validation.
email-sequence
When the user wants to create or optimize an email sequence, drip campaign, automated email flow, or lifecycle email program. Also use when the user mentions "email sequence," "drip campaign," "nurture sequence," "onboarding emails," "welcome sequence," "re-engagement emails," "email automation," or "lifecycle…
guidance
Control LLM output with regex and grammars, guarantee valid JSON/XML/code generation, enforce structured formats, and build multi-step workflows with Guidance - Microsoft Research's constrained generation framework.
gepetto
Creates detailed, sectionized implementation plans through research, stakeholder interviews, and multi-LLM review. Use when planning features that need thorough pre-implementation analysis.
gguf-quantization
GGUF format and llama.cpp quantization for efficient CPU/GPU inference. Use when deploying models on consumer hardware, Apple Silicon, or when needing flexible quantization from 2-8 bit without GPU requirements.