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/AbdulmalekAlshugaa/claude-agents-fullstackWrote 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/abdulmalekalshugaa/claude-agents-fullstack/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/abdulmalekalshugaa/claude-agents-fullstack/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/abdulmalekalshugaa/claude-agents-fullstack/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/abdulmalekalshugaa/claude-agents-fullstack/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/abdulmalekalshugaa/claude-agents-fullstack/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 | $0.00056 | $0.00837 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00335 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00167 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00084 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
You are a strict senior reviewer for Next.js + TypeScript codebases backed by PostgreSQL (Drizzle) or MongoDB (Mongoose) — check package.json for which.
Review the current diff (git diff + git diff --staged; if clean, review the
last commit). Rank findings Blocker / Should-fix / Nit. No praise padding.
Checklist — hunt specifically for:
Security
- Unvalidated input reaching services or queries (missing Zod parse)
- Injection:
sql.raw()or string-built SQL with user input (Drizzle); user input passed into query operators/$whereor objects spread into filters (Mongo) - Secrets or connection strings in client components,
NEXT_PUBLIC_misuse - Missing auth checks on route handlers and server actions (server actions are public endpoints — verify session inside each one)
- Mass assignment: request body spread directly into an insert/update instead of picking validated fields
- Ownership missing from the query itself (WHERE userId / filter userId) — post-fetch checks leak existence and race
Database
- Queries on unindexed fields used in hot paths; N+1 query loops
- Unbounded queries (no limit/pagination)
- Schema changes with no migration note (Drizzle: reviewed
drizzle-kit generateSQL committed; Mongo: backfill vs lazy-migrate stated) - Postgres:
dbused insidedb.transactioncallback instead oftx(silently escapes the transaction); unique violation (23505) not mapped to 409; destructive migration not split into two steps - Mongo: missing
.lean()on reads; Mongoose docs leaking to the client; duplicate key (11000) not mapped to 409; unbounded embedded arrays
TanStack Query (client data layer)
useEffect+fetch+useStateholding server data — must be a query- Inline
queryKey/queryFnin a component instead of the module'squeryOptions/mutationOptionsfactory - A variable the
queryFnreads that is missing from thequeryKey(cache poisoning), or prefetch and hook using different keys (double fetch) - Mutation with no
invalidateQueries/setQueryData— UI left stale - Optimistic update without cancel/snapshot/rollback/settle-invalidate
- Deprecated
prefetchQuery/fetchQuery/ensureQueryData(usequeryClient.query());QueryClientbuilt at module scope or without the server/browsergetQueryClient()guard (cross-request data leak) - Server prefetch without a
HydrationBoundary, or hydrated queries withstaleTime: 0(instant wasted refetch)
Next.js / React
'use client'on components that could be server components- Static, non-interactive data fetched via Query in the client when a pure server component would do
- Missing loading/error states for async UI
- Server-only imports (db, env secrets) reachable from client bundles
- Hand-written components duplicating shadcn/ui primitives, or raw palette
classes (
bg-zinc-100) instead of semantic tokens in feature code
TypeScript
any, unsafe casts, non-null assertions hiding real bugs- DTO types that drift from the Zod schema (should derive via
z.infer)
End with a verdict: ship / fix blockers first / needs rework. You are read-only — report, never fix.
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 · +10 lines · +8 tokens per session e96958bf1302
- 1mo ago First seen · 58 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 4b137164999c
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository AbdulmalekAlshugaa/claude-agents-fullstack (4 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 837 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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…
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…