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/wulawulu/learn-claude-code-rs/code-reviewnpx skills add wulawulu/learn-claude-code-rs --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wulawulu/learn-claude-code-rsWrote 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/wulawulu/learn-claude-code-rs/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/wulawulu/learn-claude-code-rs/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wulawulu/learn-claude-code-rs/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 | $0.01103 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00551 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00221 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00110 |
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 5d 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.
Runs shell commandslowCapability
Expected in a hook, worth knowing in a rule or an instructions file.
os.system(f"ls {user_input}") This is a copy
100% identical to code-review — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 158 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Skill
You now have expertise in conducting comprehensive code reviews. Follow this structured approach:
Review Checklist
1. Security (Critical)
Check for:
- Injection vulnerabilities: SQL, command, XSS, template injection
- Authentication issues: Hardcoded credentials, weak auth
- Authorization flaws: Missing access controls, IDOR
- Data exposure: Sensitive data in logs, error messages
- Cryptography: Weak algorithms, improper key management
- Dependencies: Known vulnerabilities (check with
npm audit,pip-audit)
# Quick security scans
npm audit # Node.js
pip-audit # Python
cargo audit # Rust
grep -r "password\|secret\|api_key" --include="*.py" --include="*.js"
2. Correctness
Check for:
- Logic errors: Off-by-one, null handling, edge cases
- Race conditions: Concurrent access without synchronization
- Resource leaks: Unclosed files, connections, memory
- Error handling: Swallowed exceptions, missing error paths
- Type safety: Implicit conversions, any types
3. Performance
Check for:
- N+1 queries: Database calls in loops
- Memory issues: Large allocations, retained references
- Blocking operations: Sync I/O in async code
- Inefficient algorithms: O(n^2) when O(n) possible
- Missing caching: Repeated expensive computations
4. Maintainability
Check for:
- Naming: Clear, consistent, descriptive
- Complexity: Functions > 50 lines, deep nesting > 3 levels
- Duplication: Copy-pasted code blocks
- Dead code: Unused imports, unreachable branches
- Comments: Outdated, redundant, or missing where needed
5. Testing
Check for:
- Coverage: Critical paths tested
- Edge cases: Null, empty, boundary values
- Mocking: External dependencies isolated
- Assertions: Meaningful, specific checks
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 158 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A a64c8c43b496
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository wulawulu/learn-claude-code-rs (136 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 1,103 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (runs shell commands). It is 100% identical to code-review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
release
Create a new versioned release with changelog. Bumps version in code, updates CHANGELOG.md, commits, tags, and pushes using the repository release flow. GitHub Actions creates the release and uses only the current changelog section as release notes. Use when the user says "release", "cut a release", "bump version"…
qa
Regression test a San feature by name. Looks for a feature doc in docs/reference/ or docs/packages/2-feature/, runs automated Go tests and interactive tmux tests, then produces a pass/fail report. Use this skill when the user says "qa", "regression test", "test feature X", "verify feature", or references a feature…
code-review
Review changed code for correctness bugs — logic errors, nil/error handling, concurrency, resource leaks, edge cases, broken invariants. Reports findings first, ordered by severity, then fixes on request. Scoped to correctness, not quality or style cleanups. Use when the user says "code review", "review my changes"…
debug
Systematic debugging that finds the root cause before changing any code — collect symptoms, trace the code path, check what changed, reproduce deterministically, form a testable hypothesis, then fix the cause (not the symptom) and prove it with a regression test. Use when the user reports a bug, a crash, a failing…
refactor
Restructure existing code without changing its behavior — extract, rename, inline, split, deduplicate, reshape — with tests holding behavior fixed before and after. Scoped to structure only: no new features, no bug fixes, no behavior changes. Use when the user says "refactor", "clean up the structure", "extract this"…
simplify
Review changed code for reuse, quality, and efficiency, then clean up what you find — duplicated logic that could reuse an existing helper, hacky or redundant patterns, needless work on hot paths. Quality cleanup only: not bugs (that's code-review) and not behavior-preserving restructuring on request (that's…