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 znlgis/my-opencode-deepseek-config --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/znlgis/my-opencode-deepseek-configWrote 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/znlgis/my-opencode-deepseek-config/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/znlgis/my-opencode-deepseek-config/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/znlgis/my-opencode-deepseek-config/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/znlgis/my-opencode-deepseek-config/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/znlgis/my-opencode-deepseek-config/code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00075 | $0.02023 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00809 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00405 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00202 |
Grade A, and why
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 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 — 190 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
Overview
A single-pass review: one pass covers all dimensions, depth scales to effective
size. Pair with security-review only when the diff touches a trust boundary.
Scope by effective size, not raw lines
Establish the change set before reading code:
- Branch vs base:
git diff --stat main...HEAD(or the stated base) - PR: use the
gh-cliskill (gh pr diff <n> --patch,gh pr view <n>) - Explicit files: just those paths
Weight each changed file by category — a 2000-line lockfile diff is not a 2000-line review. Sum the effective logic lines:
| File category | Weight | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| generated / mechanical | 0× | lockfiles, *.pb.go, snapshots, @generated, import-only reshuffles |
| data / config | 0.25× | .json, .yaml, .toml, .tf, fixtures |
| tests | 0.5× | *_test.*, *.spec.*, __tests__/ |
| logic | 1× | everything else (source code) |
Pick the path from effective size and stakes:
| Condition | Path | Behavior |
|---|---|---|
| ≤ 8 logic files and ≤ 300 effective lines | Abbreviated (default) | Single focused pass over the diff and its immediate callers. Report inline. |
| larger | Full | Walk each dimension deliberately. |
High-stakes override — route Full regardless of size when any changed
logic/config file matches: auth|authz|migration|schema|lock|concurr|public api| wire contract|serializ. A hit upgrades the depth; no hit keeps the default.
Abbreviated is the default — it costs ~an order of magnitude fewer tokens. State which path you took, the effective size, and any stakes trigger in one line.
Scope constraint: report only findings attributable to this diff. Nothing outside the blast radius — not pre-existing unchanged code, not unrelated files. ADRs and other historical decision documents are records, not living specs: do not flag them stale.
Model tier — flash first, pro on escalation
Review is two-tier so the common case never pays pro prices:
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 Changed · +22 lines c9af982ed2f8
- 1mo ago Changed 33ae69dce5c8
- 1mo ago Changed · -1 lines ce3b1f9ebeb7
- 1mo ago First seen · 169 lines · 75 tokens per session scan A 508b07f806d0
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository znlgis/my-opencode-deepseek-config (59 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 2,023 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
archify-review
Review Archify issues, PRs, or code through value, cost, and impact to support evidence-based maintenance decisions. Use for issue triage, change reviews, and code quality assessments.
code-review
Run a final code review on a pull request.
code-breaking-changes
Search for breaking changes in external integration surfaces.
plannotator
Reference for using Plannotator (its plannotator tool when you have one, otherwise the CLI): plan review, code review, annotating files, URLs, folders, and running local apps, annotating the last assistant message, browsing archived plan decisions, exporting or sharing Guided Reviews, and the Plannotator Inbox…
gh-pr-review
Automated Cherry Studio review for local branches, PRs, commits, files, architecture docs, and repository skills. Use for code or documentation reviews that need project-specific naming, main/renderer/shared placement and dependency rules, IpcApi and DataApi boundaries, lifecycle/service ownership, renderer hooks…