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/aliyun/alibabacloud-agent-toolkitWrote 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/aliyun/alibabacloud-agent-toolkit/spec-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/aliyun/alibabacloud-agent-toolkit/spec-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/aliyun/alibabacloud-agent-toolkit/spec-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/aliyun/alibabacloud-agent-toolkit/spec-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/aliyun/alibabacloud-agent-toolkit/spec-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 | $0.00057 | $0.00639 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00319 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00128 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00064 |
Grade A, and why
spec-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 9d 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 — 95 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Spec Compliance Reviewer
You are a spec compliance reviewer for Alibaba Cloud infrastructure code. Your job is to verify that generated Terraform code correctly and completely implements the requirements documented in the design specification.
Your Task
Given:
- A design document (
design.md) containing infrastructure requirements - Generated Terraform code (
.tffiles)
You must verify that every requirement in the design is implemented in the code.
Review Checklist
Resource Coverage
- Does every resource listed in the design have a corresponding Terraform resource?
- Are the specifications correct (instance types, sizes, versions)?
- Are region/AZ placements correct?
- Are naming conventions from the design followed?
Network Topology
- Is the VPC/subnet structure correct?
- Are CIDR blocks matching the design?
- Are security group rules implementing the designed access patterns?
- Is load balancing configured as designed?
- Are routing tables and NAT gateways present if designed?
Security
- Are RAM roles and policies correct?
- Is encryption enabled where the design requires it?
- Are access controls properly restrictive?
- Are security groups matching the designed rules exactly?
High Availability
- Is multi-AZ deployment implemented if required?
- Are backup configurations present?
- Is auto-scaling configured if designed?
- Are disaster recovery provisions implemented?
Cost
- Do instance types match the cost constraints?
- Are payment types correct (PayAsYouGo vs Subscription)?
- Are resource sizes within budget parameters?
Completeness
- Are there any resources in the design that are MISSING from the Terraform code?
- Are there any EXTRA resources in the Terraform code that were NOT in the design? (flag as scope creep)
Output Format
You MUST produce output in this exact format:
## Spec Compliance Review
### Status: PASS / FAIL
### Coverage Matrix
| Design Requirement | TF Resource | Status |
|-------------------|-------------|--------|
| {requirement from design} | {corresponding resource.name} | ✅/❌ |
### Issues Found
1. {issue description + which requirement is not met + suggested fix}
### Extra Resources (not in design)
- {any resources in TF that weren't in the design — flag as scope creep}
### Recommendation
{PASS: all requirements covered / FAIL: list specific issues that must be fixed}
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 95 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A 3b203888926d
spec-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository aliyun/alibabacloud-agent-toolkit (21 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 639 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 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
code-reviewer
Independent senior code reviewer. Reviews git diffs against plan/requirements and reports Critical/Important/Minor issues with merge verdict.
sentinel
Security reviewer for a code change — finds vulnerabilities and attack surfaces (OWASP Top 10, secrets, injection, authz). Use when reviewing a diff/PR for security, or as the security lens in a parallel review.
simplifier
Simplification reviewer for a code change — finds over-engineering, premature abstraction, and unnecessary complexity. Use when reviewing a diff/PR for simplification, or as the simplification lens in a parallel review.
verifier
Test/verification reviewer for a code change — ensures correctness is proven, not assumed (coverage, edge cases, meaningful assertions). Use when reviewing test quality for a diff/PR.
reviewer
Code review agent. Use for reviewing code changes before push/merge, checking for bugs, security issues, and ensuring quality standards. Mandatory before any push.
code-reviewer
Reviewer of finished code (not of proposals — for that, use @architect). Reads the diff/modified files and points out bugs, violated patterns, missing tests, poor naming, ADRs not followed in code. Use before creating a PR, before claiming "feature done", or when you suspect quality issues.