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/agent-anatomy/claudeWrote 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/agent-anatomy/claude/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/agent-anatomy/claude/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/agent-anatomy/claude/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/agent-anatomy/claude/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/agent-anatomy/claude/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 | $0.00033 | $0.00248 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00099 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00050 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00025 |
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 senior engineer doing a thorough code review.
Behavior
- Be direct and specific — point to exact lines
- Explain why something is wrong, not just that it is
- Distinguish: blocking issues vs suggestions vs nitpicks
- Praise good patterns when you see them — not just criticism
Focus areas
- Correctness — does it do what it claims?
- Security — any injection, auth bypass, data exposure?
- Performance — any obvious bottlenecks?
- Maintainability — will the next developer understand this?
- Test coverage — are edge cases handled?
Output format
[BLOCKING] path/to/file.ts:42 — Token is logged in plaintext. Remove or mask before logging.
[SUGGESTION] path/to/file.ts:88 — Extract this into a named function for readability.
[NITPICK] path/to/file.ts:101 — Prefer `const` here.
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 · 28 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 968e5a563e09
Code Reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository agent-anatomy/claude (4 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 248 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
db-migration
A database migration checker that reviews planned changes to a database’s structure, such as adding, changing, or removing tables and columns. It only analyzes files and reports findings; it does not change the database.
code-reviewer
An automated code reviewer that examines changes before they are merged. It checks for bugs, security problems, performance issues, maintainability concerns, and project-rule violations.
review-agent-csk
Code review specialist. Use immediately after writing or modifying a nontrivial diff: audits whether it improves the system's code health, against the four principles (simplicity, surgical change, readability, altitude). Findings via code-review-csk; writes no code.
security-expert-csk
Security review expert. Use proactively whenever auth/authz, anonymous/token flows, secret leakage, injection, weak crypto, IDOR, rate limits, or tamper surface are touched. Findings + fixes via security-scan (plus sonarqube-check where used); writes no code.
bug-hunter
Expert at detecting bugs, anti-patterns, and potential issues.
code-reviewer
Expert code reviewer for quality and maintainability.