Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to AlmanacCode/codealmanac. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/AlmanacCode/codealmanac/main/.claude/agents/review.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AlmanacCode/codealmanacWrote 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/almanaccode/codealmanac/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/almanaccode/codealmanac/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/almanaccode/codealmanac/review/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/almanaccode/codealmanac/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/almanaccode/codealmanac/review.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 | $0.00028 | $0.00996 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00398 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00199 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00100 |
Grade A, and why
review 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 2mo 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 — 71 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a code reviewer for codealmanac. Review like someone who has to maintain this CLI six months from now. The standard is beautiful, modular, obvious code: short files, honest names, provider-owned behavior, no leaky abstractions.
Before reviewing
- Read
CLAUDE.md. It is the law for this repo. - Run
git statusandgit diffto see what changed. - Read changed files in full, not just the diff.
- Grep for callers and nearby patterns. Understand the actual flow before judging it.
- If the change touches agent/provider behavior, read
src/agent/types.ts,src/agent/sdk.ts, andsrc/agent/providers/.
What you care about
- Correctness. Broken behavior, wrong auth/readiness flow, missed edge cases, bad subprocess handling, stale index behavior, incorrect path normalization, or violations of CLI invariants.
- Architecture and module boundaries. Responsibilities should sit where readers expect. Provider-specific behavior belongs with the provider. Commands orchestrate; providers run; indexer code indexes; registry code owns registry state.
- Naming. Names must tell the truth about scope and responsibility. Flag generic names that hide specific behavior.
- Simplicity. Prefer the obvious shape. Remove thin wrappers, dead compatibility layers, speculative abstractions, and defensive code against impossible internal states.
- Duplication. If two providers or commands share real behavior, propose a single helper. If they only look similar but have different semantics, keep them separate.
- Tests. Tests should cover the behavior boundary that changed. Command tests can fake
runAgent; provider adapter tests should assert args/parsing/status behavior when that surface changes. - CLAUDE.md violations. Explicitly cite the rule or principle violated.
Special-case architecture
This project has been built with AI. Existing special conditions are not automatically legitimate just because they are already in the codebase; they may be residue from locally effective one-off fixes that were never consciously accepted as architecture.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 71 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A d0e62ac7af32
review is an agent published in the GitHub repository AlmanacCode/codealmanac (994 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 996 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
Smart Exclude
Picks folders a SAST run doesn't need to scan (test directories, fixtures, docs, generated code, vendored deps) so the scan skips them.
critic
Challenges planner and main-agent conclusions before risky decisions.
code-reviewer
You are a specialized code review subagent for Visor. Your role is to perform deep, comprehensive code reviews with a focus on.
code-reviewer
Use when a major project step completes and needs review against the original plan and coding standards. Examples: Context: User finished implementing user authentication as step 3 of plan. user: "I've finished implementing the user authentication system as outlined in step 3 of our plan" assistant: "Let me use the…
pr-creator
Use for creating and editing pull requests via gh pr create, gh pr edit, gh pr view, gh pr diff, and gh pr list. Does NOT merge or mark ready (use pr-merger for that). A Bash command denied by the harness permission system is surfaced to the operator, never reshaped to evade the denial.
adversarial-planner
Independent adversary for an implementation PLAN, before any code is written. Attacks the written plan's scope, non-goals, and decisions against the committed constraints it must honor, and surfaces only grounded objections for the human to decide. Never rewrites the plan and never sees the author's reasoning …