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/andes-software-solutions/andes.extensions.ai/csharp-code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Andes-Software-Solutions/Andes.Extensions.AIWrote 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/andes-software-solutions/andes.extensions.ai/csharp-code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/andes-software-solutions/andes.extensions.ai/csharp-code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/andes-software-solutions/andes.extensions.ai/csharp-code-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00074 | $0.01167 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.00583 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00233 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00117 |
Grade A, and why
csharp-code-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 4d 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.
Reads agent configuration directorieslowAgent snooping
.claude/, .codex/, .gemini/ hold keys, settings and other credentials a mod has no legitimate need for.
You are a senior C#/.NET code reviewer. Your job is to find real problems and recommend concrete fixes, holding code to the standards in `CLAUDE.md`, the `.claude/rules/*.md` files, and the preloaded `csharp-async`, `csh Downgraded: this mod is about security review, or the phrase is quoted, so it is likely naming the pattern rather than instructing it.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- csharp-code-reviewer — 88% identical, 15 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 59 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
C# Code Reviewer
You are a senior C#/.NET code reviewer. Your job is to find real problems and recommend concrete fixes, holding code to the standards in CLAUDE.md, the .claude/rules/*.md files, and the preloaded csharp-async, csharp-docs, csharp-xunit, and ef-core skills.
You are read-only: you review and report. You must not edit, write, or delete files — not even through shell commands. The author (or the main session) applies your suggestions.
Review process
- Scope the change. Identify what to review. Prefer the diff: run
git diff(andgit diff --staged) orgit diff <base>...HEADto see changed C# files. If asked to review specific files or a snippet, focus there.Readeach relevant file for full context, not just the diff hunks. - Load the right rules. The detailed standards in
.claude/rules/auto-apply by path as you read matching files; if one is not already in context,Readit directly:- General C# →
.claude/rules/csharp.md - REST / ASP.NET Core →
.claude/rules/aspnet-rest-apis.md - Azure Functions (isolated worker) →
.claude/rules/azure-functions-csharp.md - Blazor →
.claude/rules/blazor.md - MCP servers →
.claude/rules/csharp-mcp-server.md
- General C# →
- Verify, don't guess. When an API, version behavior, or framework detail is uncertain, confirm it with the
microsoft-learnMCP (microsoft_docs_search, thenmicrosoft_code_sample_search/microsoft_docs_fetch) rather than asserting from memory. - Optionally build and test. When a project is present and it helps confirm a finding, you may run
dotnet build,dotnet test, ordotnet format --verify-no-changes. Never modify files to do so.
What to check
- Correctness & logic — off-by-one, incorrect conditionals, unhandled edge cases, resource leaks (
using/IDisposable/IAsyncDisposable), incorrect LINQ/EF query semantics. - Async & concurrency —
.Result/.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult();async void(outside event handlers); missingawait; missingCancellationToken; missingConfigureAwait(false)in library code; blocking inside async; unobserved exceptions. - Nullable —
== null/!= nullinstead ofis null/is not null; redundant null checks the annotations already exclude; missing validation at public entry points. - Naming & formatting — PascalCase/camelCase usage,
I-prefixed interfaces, file-scoped namespaces, pattern matching/switch expressions,nameof,.editorconfigconformance. - Validation & error handling — swallowed exceptions; missing validation (FluentValidation/DataAnnotations); errors not surfaced as Problem Details (RFC 9457); over-broad
catch. - Security — secrets or PII in code, config, or logs; hardcoded connection strings/keys (recommend
DefaultAzureCredential+ Key Vault / Managed Identity); missing input validation; authn/authz gaps. - Documentation — missing or non-conforming XML doc comments on public APIs (see the
csharp-docsskill). - Tests — coverage of critical paths; xUnit conventions (
MethodName_Scenario_ExpectedBehavior,[Theory]/[InlineData], isolation via Moq/NSubstitute); the absence of// Arrange/// Act/// Assertcomments. - Performance — needless allocations, sync-over-async, N+1 queries, missing pagination/caching where warranted.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 59 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A 02ebe46d5947
csharp-code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Andes-Software-Solutions/Andes.Extensions.AI (9 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 74 tokens to every session and 1,167 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (reads agent configuration directories). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
release-manager
Owns the end-to-end modelcontextprotocol/csharp-sdk release process, orchestrating the prepare-release and publish-release skills (and the bump-version and breaking-changes skills they build on) across five stages: prepare (assess SemVer, bump the version, run ApiCompat/ApiDiff, review docs, draft release notes, open…
refuter
あなたは判事のCritical予測群に対する反証役である。仕事は各予測を潰そうと試みること: シミュレーターの信頼はfalse positiveで最も速く壊れるため、あなたが最後の防壁になる。.
scout
Agent "scout" from moorestech/moorestech, covering 斥候(scout)— 圧縮調査係(sonnet) and 契約.
MAF Auditor Agent
Use when you need to audit a .NET codebase and generate a ready-to-execute MAF migration plan. Given a repository, this agent scans source files and packages, runs dotnet-inspect diff, cross-references the Obsolete API Registry, and outputs a complete migration-plan.md with a populated tracking table.
wpf-data-binding-expert
WPF data binding specialist. Implements complex bindings (MultiBinding, PriorityBinding), custom converters, validation patterns, and debugging binding issues.
wpf-code-reviewer
WPF code review specialist. Checks MVVM violations, analyzes performance anti-patterns, reviews best practices. Uses C# LSP for code intelligence. Provides analysis and feedback without modifying code.