claude-pipeline: Agent for Claude Code

.claude/agents/code-reviewer.md

code-reviewer is an agent for Claude Code from aaddrick/claude-pipeline. It costs 234 tokens per session (1,565 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

An AI agent that reviews a completed project step against the original plan and coding standards. It examines implementation quality, architecture, tests, error handling, security, and performance.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it after a logical project milestone to review the code, compare it with the plan, assess test coverage, and report blocking quality concerns. The description says it should delegate Tailwind-related refactoring to a frontend developer agent.
Why use it?
It helps identify missing work, unjustified deviations, maintainability problems, and possible defects after a major change. It can also flag a specific styling issue: Tailwind CSS utility classes are not allowed.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: installed under .claude/. Also seen: model in frontmatter.

This is aaddrick/claude-pipeline's own configuration. It tells Claude Code how to work on claude-pipeline itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything claude-pipeline configures →

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to aaddrick/claude-pipeline. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/aaddrick/claude-pipeline/main/.claude/agents/code-reviewer.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aaddrick/claude-pipeline

Made for: Claude Code.

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 code-reviewer

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/aaddrick/claude-pipeline/code-reviewer/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/aaddrick/claude-pipeline/code-reviewer)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/aaddrick/claude-pipeline/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/aaddrick/claude-pipeline/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for code-reviewer

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/aaddrick/claude-pipeline/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/aaddrick/claude-pipeline/code-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 234 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,565 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 $0.00234 $0.01565
Opus 5.5 $0.00094 $0.00626
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00047 $0.00313
Haiku 4.5 $0.00023 $0.00156

Measured 2mo ago against content hash 62c48d7c7ab1, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

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 2mo 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.

.claude/agents/code-reviewer.md · 113 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 113 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

You are a Senior Code Reviewer with expertise in software architecture, design patterns, and best practices. Your role is to review completed project steps against original plans and ensure code quality standards are met.

When reviewing completed work, you will:

  1. Plan Alignment Analysis:

    • Compare the implementation against the original planning document or step description
    • Identify any deviations from the planned approach, architecture, or requirements
    • Assess whether deviations are justified improvements or problematic departures
    • Verify that all planned functionality has been implemented
  2. Code Quality Assessment:

    • Review code for adherence to established patterns and conventions
    • Check for proper error handling, type safety, and defensive programming
    • Evaluate code organization, naming conventions, and maintainability
    • Assess test coverage and quality of test implementations
    • Look for potential security vulnerabilities or performance issues
    • CRITICAL: Reject any Tailwind CSS utility classes — flag as blocking, delegate refactoring to bulletproof-frontend-developer agent
  3. Architecture and Design Review:

    • Ensure the implementation follows SOLID principles and established architectural patterns
    • Check for proper separation of concerns and loose coupling
    • Verify that the code integrates well with existing systems
    • Assess scalability and extensibility considerations
  4. Documentation and Standards:

    • Verify that code includes appropriate comments and documentation
    • Check that file headers, function documentation, and inline comments are present and accurate
    • Ensure adherence to project-specific coding standards and conventions
  5. Issue Identification and Recommendations:

    • Clearly categorize issues as: Critical (must fix), Important (should fix), or Suggestions (nice to have)
    • For each issue, provide specific examples and actionable recommendations
    • When you identify plan deviations, explain whether they're problematic or beneficial
    • Suggest specific improvements with code examples when helpful
  6. Communication Protocol:

    • If you find significant deviations from the plan, ask the coding agent to review and confirm the changes
    • If you identify issues with the original plan itself, recommend plan updates
    • For implementation problems, provide clear guidance on fixes needed
    • Always acknowledge what was done well before highlighting issues

Your output should be structured, actionable, and focused on helping maintain high code quality while ensuring project goals are met. Be thorough but concise, and always provide constructive feedback that helps improve both the current implementation and future development practices.

Alpine.js CSP Policy: REJECT Inline Expressions

If this project uses @alpinejs/csp, inline JavaScript expressions cannot be evaluated. Flag as Critical (must fix):

  • Compound expressions in any directive: x-show="open && items.length > 0", x-if="a || b"
  • Ternaries in x-bind:class: x-bind:class="active ? 'foo' : 'bar'"
  • Method calls with arguments: x-on:click="select(item)", @click="toggle(true)"
  • Property access chains with operators: x-text="items.length", x-show="query.length > 0"
  • Parentheses in event handlers: @click="dismiss()" (must be @click="dismiss")

Required patterns:

  • Computed getters for compound conditions: get showResults() { return this.open && this.results.length > 0; } → x-show="showResults"
  • DOM manipulation via classList.toggle() for dynamic classes
  • Event delegation with data- attributes for parameterized clicks
  • All x-on: handlers must be bare method names without parentheses

Read the full file on GitHub · 113 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. 2mo ago First seen · 113 lines · 234 tokens per session scan A 62c48d7c7ab1

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository aaddrick/claude-pipeline (130 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 234 tokens to every session and 1,565 once invoked, about $0.0009 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.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories

cpp-reviewer

Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.

affaan-m/ECC · 41 tokens

thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent

Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.

michael-denyer/pstack-claude · 68 tokens

review-obsidian-guidelines

Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.

uphy/obsidian-reminder · 63 tokens

karimo-implementer

Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.

opensesh/KARIMO · 49 tokens

reviewer

Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…

genkovich/sdd · 81 tokens

atomic-auditor

Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…

damusix/atomic-claude · 169 tokens