review-security

review-security is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from XyrusCode/ai-sync. It costs 12 tokens per session (777 once invoked), scanned A, a copy of review-security, MIT.

A code-review helper that sends the current code changes to a security reviewer focused on finding vulnerabilities.

In plain words
What is it for?
It runs one security review against the repository's changes and returns the findings.
Why use it?
It adds a focused security check to code changes before they are merged.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one. Also seen: mentions subagents.

Good fit It runs one security review against the repository's changes and returns the findings.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/xyruscode/ai-sync/review-security
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add XyrusCode/ai-sync --skill review-security
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/XyrusCode/ai-sync

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for review-security

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/xyruscode/ai-sync/review-security/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/xyruscode/ai-sync/review-security)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/xyruscode/ai-sync/review-security"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/xyruscode/ai-sync/review-security/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for review-security

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/xyruscode/ai-sync/review-security"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/xyruscode/ai-sync/review-security.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 12 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 777 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin 100% copy Near-identical to another mod in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00012 $0.00777
Opus 5.5 $0.00005 $0.00311
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00002 $0.00155
Haiku 4.5 $0.00001 $0.00078

Measured 1mo ago against content hash d007ec5a617e, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

review-security 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.

Origin

This is a copy

100% identical to review-security — 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.

skills/review-security/SKILL.md · 52 lines

What it actually says

Review Security

Use this skill when the user asks to run /review-security.

Launch exactly one security-review subagent with:

  • run_in_background: false unless explicitly asked to run in background
  • description: "Security Review"
  • subagent_type: "security-review"

The review subagent computes the local diff from the repository path, so do not compute the diff yourself before launching it. The repository path should be the active workspace or repository root for the code the user wants reviewed.

By default, the review subagent infers the repository's actual base branch, such as main, when computing branch changes. In most cases, do not provide Base Branch. Only provide it if you know the current branch or PR should be compared against a specific branch other than the repository's default base branch, such as when you created the current branch from another branch.

Special case: if the user explicitly asks to review a specific PR or branch, make sure that target is checked out before launching the subagent:

  • Examples include github.com/... /review, review {link}, or review {branch-name}.
  • Resolve the provided PR link, PR number, or branch name to the PR head branch or named branch.
  • Check whether the target branch is already the currently checked out local branch. If it is, continue.
  • If a different branch is currently checked out, try to switch to the target branch.
  • If Git refuses to switch because local files would be overwritten, conflicts need resolution, or another checkout blocker occurs, explain the blocker and ask whether the user wants to stash local changes before retrying.
  • Only stash after the user confirms. If the stash succeeds, retry switching to the target branch.
  • Launch the review subagent only after the target branch is checked out locally.

Use this exact prompt shape:

Full Repository Path: <absolute repository path>
Diff: <one of: "branch changes", "uncommitted changes">
Base Branch: <only include this line when reviewing branch changes against a known specific base branch>
Custom Instructions: <only include this line when the user gave specific review instructions>

Default to branch changes, which reviews branch changes against the merge-base with the default/base branch, including committed, staged, and unstaged changes. If the user asks to review only uncommitted, local working tree, dirty, or not-yet-committed changes, use uncommitted changes.

If the review subagent fails before producing findings, inspect the failure text.

  • If the failure is caused by calling the subagent incorrectly, such as a missing Full Repository Path, missing Diff, wrong prompt shape, or wrong subagent type, correct the invocation and retry it once immediately.
  • For any other subagent failure, retry once with the same prompt shape.
  • If the same failure persists after the retry, stop. Briefly tell the user that the review subagent could not complete and include the short error or blocker. Do not keep retrying.

After the subagent finishes, summarize the result:

  • If it reports that no diff was found or the diff is empty, tell the user in one sentence that there was no diff to review.
  • If it found no issues, give a one-line status such as "Security review found 2 findings / Security review found no issues".
  • If it found issues, print a compact markdown table with one row per finding, sorted by severity (highest first), using exactly these columns: Severity, Location (file:line), Finding. Put the file and line in the location column as file:line.

Do not fix findings or rerun review unless the user explicitly asks for that next step.

Changes

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.

  1. 1mo ago First seen · 52 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A d007ec5a617e

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-security is a skill published in the GitHub repository XyrusCode/ai-sync (2 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 777 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to review-security, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

autoreview

Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.

openclaw/clawhub · 17 tokens

omh-code-review

This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).

rlaope/oh-my-hermes · 48 tokens

revdiff-plan

Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…

umputun/revdiff · 84 tokens

re0-merge

Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…

LilMGenius/paperthin · 70 tokens

explore-unknowns

Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…

dzhng/skills · 162 tokens

asplos-writing-style

Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…

brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills · 65 tokens