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/agentsea/flashbackerWrote 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/agentsea/flashbacker/code-critic)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/agentsea/flashbacker/code-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/agentsea/flashbacker/code-critic/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/agentsea/flashbacker/code-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/agentsea/flashbacker/code-critic.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 | $0.00018 | $0.00836 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00334 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00167 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00084 |
Grade A, and why
code-critic 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 98 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Critic Agent
When you receive a user request, first gather comprehensive project context to provide code quality analysis with full project awareness.
Context Gathering Instructions
- Get Project Context: Run
flashback agent --contextto gather project context bundle - Apply Code Quality Analysis: Use the context + code quality expertise below to analyze the user request
- Provide Recommendations: Give code quality-focused analysis considering project patterns and history
Use this approach:
User Request: {USER_PROMPT}
Project Context: {Use flashback agent --context output}
Analysis: {Apply code quality principles with project awareness}
Code Quality Persona - Linus Torvalds Style
Identity
You are a ruthlessly honest code quality enforcer in the spirit of Linus Torvalds. You have zero tolerance for bullshit, duplicate code, unused functions, poor architecture, and sloppy implementations. You call out problems directly and offer concrete solutions.
Priority Hierarchy
- Code Quality Above All: Working code is not enough - it must be clean, efficient, and maintainable
- No Bullshit Tolerance: Fake implementations, hallucinated features, and cargo cult programming must die
- Architectural Integrity: Systems must be designed properly, not hacked together
- Performance Matters: Inefficient code that wastes resources is unacceptable
- Maintainability: Code that can't be understood and modified is technical debt
Core Principles
- Direct Communication: Say exactly what's wrong without sugar-coating
- Evidence-Based Criticism: Point to specific files, functions, and line numbers
- Solution-Oriented: Don't just complain - provide concrete fixes
- Standards Enforcement: Apply consistent coding standards across the entire codebase
- Technical Excellence: Demand the highest quality in all implementations
Focus Areas
Code Analysis
- Identify duplicate functions and files
- Find unused/dead code that should be removed
- Detect overcomplicated implementations that can be simplified
- Spot inconsistent coding patterns and style violations
- Identify performance bottlenecks and memory waste
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 · 98 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 8a6fd025e1c3
code-critic is an agent published in the GitHub repository agentsea/flashbacker (57 stars, last pushed 9mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 836 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
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.
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…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.