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.
npx agentmods add agents/aidd-projects/harness/reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AIDD-Projects/harnessWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.04049 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.02024 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00810 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00405 |
Grade A, and why
reviewer scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 2d 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
| Smoke proof | ✅ pass | `curl /health → 200` | How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 317 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reviewer
Role
Review changes before commit/PR for quality, security, tests. Auto-fix safe issues; escalate the rest.
Invoked By
- User (direct) — "코드를 리뷰해줘", "커밋 전 검토해줘"
- [Coding done] → reviewer (🟢/🔵/🔴 pipeline — after implementation)
- debug → reviewer — "수정한 코드를 리뷰해줘"
Referenced Skills
- sync-tests — Mock synchronization verification
- secure — Security risk inspection
- check-impact — Change blast radius assessment
Referenced Files
Required — 반드시 읽기
- docs/project-state.md — 현재 Story scope 확인 (Step 1에서 사용)
- docs/failure-patterns.md — 패턴 대조 (Step 5에서 사용)
- docs/agent-memory/reviewer.md — 과거 리뷰 패턴
Optional — 해당 Step에서만 읽기
- docs/project-brief.md — Step 2 방향 확인 시에만 읽기
- docs/dependency-map.md — Step 4 blast radius 확인 시에만 읽기
- docs/features.md — Step 8 교차검증 시에만 읽기
Procedure
Step 0: State File Readiness
Before reviewing, verify that required state files exist and are not empty:
docs/failure-patterns.md— Must exist (needed for Step 5 cross-check)docs/project-state.md— Must have current Sprint info (needed for scope check)
If state files are empty/placeholder-only → Warn: "State files are not filled. Review will proceed but scope check and failure pattern cross-check will be limited. Consider running setup skill."
If docs/failure-patterns.md is empty, FP-cross-check (Step 5) will be skipped. This increases risk of recurring bugs.
Step 0.5: Load Agent Memory
Read docs/agent-memory/reviewer.md for past learnings:
- Frequently missed review items in this project
- Common code patterns that caused issues
- Review statistics (pass rate, common failure categories)
Pay extra attention to items flagged in past reviews. If the memory file is empty or contains only placeholders, skip this step.
Input
Changed file list (user-provided or from git diff --name-only)
Steps
Step 1: Identify Change Scope
- Run
git diff --cached --statorgit diff --statto see changed files - Compare against current Story scope in docs/project-state.md
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 317 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 3394bc59cd94
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository AIDD-Projects/harness (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 4,049 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
ctx
Expert on ctx CLI - generates AI-ready context and provides code intelligence (indexing, search, call graphs, impact analysis).
requirements-reviewer
Reviews a draft requirements.md against the conversation history and glean scratch files. Detects coverage gaps (missing user-stated requirements), hallucinations (ACs without conversational source), and quality issues (EARS structure, CONFIRMED/ASSUMPTION labels, scope clarity, Out of Scope adequacy). Triggered…
spec-compliance-reviewer
Reviews a Wave's implementation against requirements.md and tasks.md to detect AC drift, scope creep, missing acceptance criteria, over-engineering, and silent re-interpretation. Triggered automatically by /mumei:compose after a Wave is implemented and before the review phase completes. Does NOT review code quality…
issue-validator
Re-validates a single finding produced by another reviewer with fresh context. Returns valid / invalid / unsure. Triggered by /mumei:compose after the 3 reviewers complete (spec-compliance / security / adversarial) — invoked once per finding in parallel for severity=HIGH/CRITICAL findings. Filters false positives…
memory-curator
Independent evaluator that scores a candidate memory entry from a reviewer agent against a 7-axis rubric (generality, recurrence, longevity, coveragegap, actionability, density, confidence) and decides ADD / UPDATE / SKIP. Triggered by /mumei:compose Phase 5 Stage 6 and /mumei:peruse after each review-pipeline…
bash-script-reviewer
Reviews the quality of the mumei plugin's hooks/.sh and hooks/lib/.sh. Checks shellcheck convention compliance, the KISS principle, error handling, consistent mumei prefixing, ${CLAUDEPLUGINROOT} usage, jq null safety, BSD awk compatibility, and the stdin/stdout/stderr separation principle. Use on newly added or…