review-pr

review-pr is a skill for Claude Code from yonatangross/orchestkit. It costs 69 tokens per session (6,351 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A pull-request review workflow that checks code quality, security, tests, architecture, and performance in parallel, then combines the results into a review report.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review a pull request or feature branch and produce comments marked as praise, issue, suggestion, or nitpick.
Why use it?
It reduces the need to inspect every concern manually and gives the pull request a clear approve-or-request-changes decision.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: allowed-tools in frontmatter. Also seen: mentions subagents; names the AskUserQuestion tool; mentions Claude Code.

Runs only inside its plugin — its command needs a path that Claude Code sets for a plugin’s own hooks and for nothing else. Install the plugin, not this.

Part of the ork plugin — 106 skills, 35 commands, 36 agents, 32 hooks shipped together

Good fit Use it to review a pull request or feature branch and produce comments marked as praise, issue, suggestion, or nitpick.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install

Getting it into your agent

This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.

Claude Code
/plugin marketplace add yonatangross/orchestkit
Claude Code
/plugin install ork

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install ork, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 106 skills, 35 commands, 36 agents, 32 hooks.

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-pr

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yonatangross/orchestkit/review-pr.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/yonatangross/orchestkit/review-pr)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yonatangross/orchestkit/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yonatangross/orchestkit/review-pr.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 69 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 6,351 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 original No closer match found 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 $0.00069 $0.06351
Opus 5 $0.00034 $0.03175
Sonnet 5 $0.00014 $0.01270
Haiku 4.5 $0.00007 $0.00635

Measured today against content hash a259921af31a, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

review-pr 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 today.

The scan reads SKILL.md. This mod also ships 1 executable file (scripts/verdict_writeback.py), listed below but not scanned — reading those needs a real analyzer, not pattern matching.

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.

plugins/ork/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md · 492 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 492 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Review PR

Deep code review using 6-7 parallel specialized agents.

Quick Start

/ork:review-pr 123
/ork:review-pr feature-branch

Opus 5: Parallel agents use native adaptive thinking for deeper analysis. Complexity-aware routing matches agent model to review difficulty.


Argument Resolution

The PR number or branch is passed as the skill argument. Resolve it immediately:

PR_NUMBER = "$ARGUMENTS[0]"  # e.g., "123" or "feature-branch"

# If no argument provided, check environment
if not PR_NUMBER:
    PR_NUMBER = os.environ.get("ORCHESTKIT_PR_URL", "").split("/")[-1]

# If still empty, detect from current branch
if not PR_NUMBER:
    PR_NUMBER = "$(gh pr view --json number -q .number 2>/dev/null)"

Use PR_NUMBER consistently in all subsequent commands and agent prompts.


STEP 0: Verify User Intent with AskUserQuestion

BEFORE creating tasks, clarify review focus:

AskUserQuestion(
  questions=[{
    "question": "What type of review do you need?",
    "header": "Focus",
    "options": [
      {"label": "Full review (Recommended)", "description": "Security + code quality + tests + architecture"},
      {"label": "Security focus", "description": "Prioritize security vulnerabilities"},
      {"label": "Performance focus", "description": "Focus on performance implications"},
      {"label": "Quick review", "description": "High-level review, skip deep analysis"}
    ],
    "multiSelect": false
  }]
)

Based on answer, adjust workflow:

  • Full review: All 6-7 parallel agents
  • Security focus: Prioritize security-auditor, reduce other agents
  • Performance focus: Add frontend-performance-engineer agent
  • Quick review: Single code-quality-reviewer agent only

"Ultra" mode → defer to claude ultrareview (CC 2.1.120+, #1542)

If the user asks for an "ultra" / "deep" / "thorough" review and the host is on CC ≥ 2.1.120, defer to the native subcommand instead of re-implementing the multi-agent loop in skill instructions:

Read the full file on GitHub · 492 lines

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. today Changed a259921af31a
  2. 2d ago First seen · 492 lines · 69 tokens per session scan A 1ebcb33d53c5

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-pr is a skill published in the GitHub repository yonatangross/orchestkit (231 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 69 tokens to every session and 6,351 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-05.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

review

Enter the Review phase of CocoBrew. Aggregates findings from Code Quality Advisor, CocoCupper intelligence, spec compliance check, and decision coverage gate. Produces review.md with decision points. Requires developer approval before $ship can proceed.

Snowflake-Labs/cocoplus · 50 tokens

stage-coach

Consume CocoSentinel per-stage external coach requests and produce stage quality scores.

Snowflake-Labs/cocoplus · 19 tokens

coding

Use when five specialized coding agents (linter, perf, refactor, security, test) that enforce quality gates across the development lifecycle. From lint enforcement through performance profiling, refactoring, security auditing, and test coverage. Use when working with coding agents.

oyi77/1ai-skills · 54 tokens

pn-best-of-n

Run 2–3 competing implementations of the same spec in isolated worktrees, eliminate failures via objective gates, then judge survivors with a separate premium-tier pass. Use for ambiguous algorithm/API/refactor choices with strong tests — not auth/security paths.

perniemann/pnCore · 54 tokens

code-reviewer

A code-review workflow written in Chinese that checks software changes for correctness, security, performance, and maintainability. It also defines a report format for critical issues and suggestions.

halexzd686-cloud/SoloFlow · 24 tokens

test-writing

Write tests that catch real regressions — behavior-focused, minimal mocking, edge cases chosen from the code's actual branches. Use when adding tests for new code or backfilling tests for a fix.

jnMetaCode/skillet · 43 tokens