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 yeaight7/agent-powerups --skill requesting-code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/yeaight7/agent-powerupsWrote 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/yeaight7/agent-powerups/requesting-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yeaight7/agent-powerups/requesting-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yeaight7/agent-powerups/requesting-code-review/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/yeaight7/agent-powerups/requesting-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yeaight7/agent-powerups/requesting-code-review.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 | $0.00023 | $0.00353 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00177 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00071 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00035 |
Grade A, and why
requesting-code-review 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 3d 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.
What it actually says
Requesting Code Review
Purpose
Dispatch a focused reviewer with enough context to catch bugs, requirement gaps, and risky assumptions before merge.
When to Use
- After a major feature
- Before merge
- After a complex bug fix
- During multi-task execution when review checkpoints matter
Requirements
Preferred inputs:
- local git range
- written requirements or plan
Helpful check:
git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree
Inputs
- What was implemented
- Requirements or plan
- Base and head revisions, if available
Workflow
- Get the git range when local git is available.
git rev-parse origin/main
git rev-parse HEAD
- Dispatch a reviewer using
references/code-reviewer.md. - Include summary, requirements, and diff range.
- Fix critical issues first, then important ones.
Output
- strengths
- critical, important, and minor issues
- recommendations
- merge readiness assessment
Verification
- Reviewer received requirements or plan
- Reviewer received a diff range or equivalent context
- Critical issues were not ignored
- Important issues were resolved or explicitly deferred
Failure Modes
- skipping review
- incomplete diff context
- ignoring critical issues
- accepting feedback blindly
Missing Dependency Behavior
If local git range is unavailable:
- Say local git context is missing.
- Ask for an explicit diff, patch, or file list.
- Do not pretend a git-based review scope was provided.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 3d ago First seen · 79 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 8579571a7277
requesting-code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository yeaight7/agent-powerups (6 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 353 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-14.
Other skills, from other repositories
github-code-review
Review PRs: diffs, inline comments via gh or REST.
simplify-code
Sequential 3-lens cleanup of recent code changes.
requesting-code-review
Pre-commit review: security scan, quality gates, auto-fix.
kodama-constraints
Enforce non-negotiable safety, scope, security, and quality constraints for implementation and review work.
hqe
Comprehensive codebase health auditing, remediation, and verification skill based on the canonical HQE Protocol v5.0.0.
adk-review
Reviews the uncommitted changes in an adk-python working tree and reports correctness, design, public-API stability, test, sample and documentation gaps as a prioritized findings report, fixing them only when asked. Use when the user asks to review local changes, wants a self-review before opening a pull request, asks…