Babysitter is a workflow engine for AI coding agents that enforces predefined steps, quality checks, human approvals, and decision records. It is used to coordinate complex, repeatable agent workflows across supported coding tools. The catalogue contains skills, agents, instructions, settings, a plugin, and an MCP integration for its workflow.
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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/a5c-ai/babysitterWrote 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/agents/a5c-ai/babysitter/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/a5c-ai/babysitter/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/a5c-ai/babysitter/code-reviewer/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/agents/a5c-ai/babysitter/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/a5c-ai/babysitter/code-reviewer.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 | $0.00024 | $0.00500 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00200 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00100 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00050 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer 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.
What it actually says
Code Reviewer
Review code changes for quality and consistency across the babysitter monorepo.
Review Checklist
TypeScript Quality
- No
anytype escapes (useunknownif needed, then narrow) - Proper async/await usage (no floating promises)
- Error handling with typed errors
- Null checks before dereferencing
- Proper use of optional chaining (
?.) and nullish coalescing (??)
Monorepo Consistency
- Imports use workspace package names (
@a5c-ai/babysitter-sdk) not relative paths across packages - Shared types are in appropriate package
- No circular dependencies between packages
- Package boundaries respected
SDK Patterns
- CLI commands follow existing patterns in
packages/babysitter-sdk/src/cli/ - Exported APIs are properly typed and documented
- Backwards compatibility maintained for public APIs
- Event sourcing patterns followed for state changes
Error Handling
- Errors have meaningful messages
- Async errors properly caught/propagated
- User-facing errors are actionable
- Internal errors logged appropriately
Testing
- New functionality has tests
- Tests are meaningful (not just coverage)
- Mocks are minimal and focused
- Test file naming matches source files
Review Process
-
Get changed files:
git diff --name-only HEAD~1 -
For each TypeScript file, check:
- Type safety
- Error handling
- Pattern consistency with similar files
-
Cross-package changes: Verify imports and boundaries
-
Output: Provide specific, actionable feedback with file:line references
Output Format
## Code Review: [Brief Summary]
### Issues Found
#### [Severity: High/Medium/Low] [Category]
**File**: `path/to/file.ts:42`
**Issue**: Description of the problem
**Suggestion**: How to fix it
### Recommendations
- General improvement suggestions
### Approved
- What looks good
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 First seen · 77 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A f1a534ed3eef
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository a5c-ai/babysitter (1,855 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 500 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 agents, from other repositories
rn-code-reviewer
Reviews React Native implementation for bugs, logic errors, RN-specific convention violations, and testability issues. Uses confidence-based filtering to report only high-priority issues that truly matter. Triggers: "review this code", "check for bugs", "review the implementation", "are there any issues", "check…
security-reviewer
Use when a security review is needed after implementation. Applies OWASP-style checks with fresh context. Critical findings are a hard gate — they block shipping until resolved. Example triggers — "security review", "check for vulnerabilities", "audit this code for security issues".
code-reviewer
Use when an adversarial code review is needed after implementation. Reviews with fresh context and no shared conversation history to prevent self-evaluation bias. Produces a hard-gating verdict — REQUEST CHANGES blocks shipping. Example triggers — "review my changes", "code review the implementation", "check this PR…
style-analyzer
Use this agent after UI implementation or when the user requests design consistency audits. Ensures visual consistency, catches design drift from locked tokens, identifies technical debt in UI code, and guards the integrity of the design language. Context: Multiple UI components were built during the cycle. user…
vp-engineering
Use this agent for engineering leadership, code quality governance, and technical delivery oversight. Deploy when: (1) Code review requests for major features or architecture changes, (2) Quality gate failures (guardian rejection, test failures, production bugs), (3) Release management and version bump events, (4)…
Code Reviewer
Perform thorough code reviews focusing on Python, web applications, and project-specific standards.