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/zate/cc-plugins/reviewnpx skills add Zate/cc-plugins --skill reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Zate/cc-pluginsWhat 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 | $0.00015 | $0.00523 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00262 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00105 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
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 2d 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
Review - Code Review
Comprehensive code review for changes, PRs, or specific files. You do the work directly.
Step 1: Identify Scope
AskUserQuestion:
questions:
- question: "What would you like to review?"
header: "Scope"
multiSelect: false
options:
- label: "Uncommitted changes"
description: "Review git diff"
- label: "Staged changes"
description: "Review git diff --cached"
- label: "Recent commits"
description: "Review last few commits"
- label: "Specific files"
description: "I'll specify paths"
Step 2: Gather Code
git diff # Uncommitted
git diff --cached # Staged
git log -p -n 3 # Recent commits
gh pr diff [number] # PR
Step 3: Review
Check these areas directly:
Correctness
- Logic errors, edge cases, error handling
Security
- Input validation, no hardcoded secrets, injection risks
Quality
- Clear naming, no duplication, appropriate comments
Performance
- No N+1 queries, proper resource handling
Step 4: Report
Present findings by severity:
## Code Review
### Critical (Must Fix)
- [Issue]: [Location] - [Problem and fix]
### High Priority
- [Issue]: [Location] - [Problem and fix]
### Suggestions
- [Minor improvements]
### Positive
- [Good patterns observed]
Step 5: Next Steps
AskUserQuestion:
questions:
- question: "Review complete. How proceed?"
header: "Action"
multiSelect: false
options:
- label: "Fix critical"
description: "Address blockers only"
- label: "Fix all"
description: "Apply all suggested fixes"
- label: "Accept as-is"
description: "Proceed without changes"
If fixing, make the changes directly using Edit tool.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 102 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 04e3fbc5f2d4
review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Zate/cc-plugins (10 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 523 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
agent-host-chat-contributions
Build and review cross-cutting agent-host chat behavior through lifecycle contributions. Use when adding turn lifecycle side effects, prompt or context injection, restored-history transformation, protocol-action observation, or when reviewing changes that add code to AgentSideEffects or AgentService.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.