Is code-review safe to install?

SaferSkills independently audited code-review (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.

CategoryWeightCategory scoreContribution

Securityprompt, exec, net, exfil, eval

35%

100

35.0 pts

Supply chainhash, typosquat, maintainer, lockfile

20%

100

20.0 pts

Maintenancestaleness, pinning, CI

15%

100

15.0 pts

TransparencySKILL.md, perms, README

15%

100

15.0 pts

Communityinstalls, verify, response

15%

100

15.0 pts

Findings & checks · 0 flagged

Securityscore 100 · 0 findings

✓—All security checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass

Supply chainscore 100 · 0 findings

✓—All supply chain checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass

Maintenancescore 100 · 0 findings

✓—All maintenance checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass

Transparencyscore 100 · 0 findings

✓—All transparency checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass

Communityscore 100 · 0 findings

✓—All community checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass

The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.

.claude/skills/code-review/SKILL.md · 1 file

.claude/skills/code-review/SKILL.md1.8 KB · Markdown

name: code-review

description: Use this skill for code review and PR review tasks. Covers review methodology, what to flag, what to skip, and output structure.

Code Review

Review a GitHub pull request for substantive issues. Focus on what matters, skip what doesn't.

Steps

Run gh pr view {pr_number} --json title,body,files to understand the PR's purpose and scope.
Run gh pr diff {pr_number} to read the full diff.
Before commenting, read surrounding code to understand full context — a pattern that looks wrong in isolation may be an established convention.

Focus Areas (priority order)

Correctness — Logic bugs, edge cases, error handling
Security — Input validation, injection risks, secrets exposure
Reliability — Race conditions, failure modes, resource leaks
Performance — Inefficient algorithms, N+1 queries, unnecessary work
Breaking changes — API/behavior changes affecting callers
Test coverage — Are new code paths tested?

Skip style/formatting unless it materially impacts readability. Do not nitpick naming, style preferences, or issues linters catch.

Severity Levels

Blocking: Must fix before merge (bugs, security, significant reliability/performance issues, breaking changes)
Non-blocking: Suggestions for improvement (optional)

Output Format

Findings

For each issue found:

#### [Issue Title]

Severity: blocking | non-blocking
Location: file_path:line_number
Description: What the issue is and why it matters
Suggested Fix: Concrete code change or approach

If no issues found, state that the changes look correct and explain why.

Summary

Overall assessment: is the PR ready to merge, or does it need changes? List the most important issues if any.

code-review— agent skill

Is code-review safe to install?

Code Review

Steps

Focus Areas (priority order)

Severity Levels

Output Format

Findings

Summary

Audit the pieces. Scan the whole. Decide.