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 xonovex/platform --skill code-review-guidegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/xonovex/platformWrote 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/xonovex/platform/code-review-guide)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/xonovex/platform/code-review-guide"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/xonovex/platform/code-review-guide/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/xonovex/platform/code-review-guide"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/xonovex/platform/code-review-guide.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 | $0.00147 | $0.01309 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00059 | $0.00524 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00029 | $0.00262 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00131 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-guide 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 1mo 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 — 62 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code-review feedback: quick reference
Host-independent review-comment craft. Every comment states its type and its urgency: a reader must never guess whether it blocks the merge. Review operations return findings inline and never post, edit, resolve, or persist them. A separate Publish operation may select a matching host skill for delivery.
Essentials
- Label every comment - Conventional Comments format
label (decoration): subject; the label categorizes (issue / suggestion / nitpick / question / praise / ...), see references/conventional-comments.md - Set urgency with a decoration -
(blocking)must be fixed before merge,(non-blocking)is the author's discretion,(if-minor)resolve only if the change is small; absence = ambiguity, see references/conventional-comments.md - One summary plus anchored inline comments - a top-level summary carries the verdict and the headline issues; the detail and suggested code go inline on the exact line, see references/review-structure.md
- Cross-link, never cross-reference by number - link the summary to its inline threads; a reader does not see your "comment 3" numbering, see references/review-structure.md
- Verify before you assert - check each claim against the branch code / API / design-system source and cite
file:line; never review from memory, see references/review-structure.md - Lead with what works, then be specific - praise is a label too; for every issue show the fix, not just the problem, see references/review-structure.md
- Carry findings in a shared contract - analyze and refine return one canonical findings shape, anchored to new-file lines; later Publish or Execute operations may pass it to a host skill, see references/findings-schema.md, references/review-analyze.md, references/review-refine.md
What ships with it
9 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 62 lines · 147 tokens per session scan A 2e802e2ba3f4
code-review-guide is a skill published in the GitHub repository xonovex/platform (6 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 147 tokens to every session and 1,309 once invoked, about $0.0006 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-09-08.
Other skills, from other repositories
gh-cli-github
List/create PRs, issues, releases, and CI run status via the gh CLI.
find-simplifications
Use for a periodic repo-wide sweep of qwen-code for accumulated excess surface — dead components and files, orphaned locale keys, exports nothing consumes, added-then-removed scaffolding — filing candidates on a tracking issue and landing only what a maintainer has said yes to. Repo-wide and evidence-first; every…
review
Adversarial fresh-context review and risk check of an increment before it ships; every finding cites path:line and is re-verified. Use for "review", "qa", "quality check", "critique this".
tech-debt-ci-review
Codex adapter for deep technical-debt and CI-stability audits. Use when asked to find test theater, flaky tests, missing or mis-scoped tests, brittle CI/toolchain behavior, structural debt blocking green PRs, or a remediation order for opencode-swarm.
software-design
This skill should be used when the user asks to "handle errors", "inject dependencies", "return Result", "make it immutable", or implements business logic or error handling.
coding-review-agent-loop
This skill lets you run the coding-review-agent-loop orchestration directly inside an interactive Claude Code session, without calling claude -p for Claude turns.