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/Andyduck-ops/omp-flowWrote 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/andyduck-ops/omp-flow/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/andyduck-ops/omp-flow/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/andyduck-ops/omp-flow/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/andyduck-ops/omp-flow/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/andyduck-ops/omp-flow/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 | $0.00019 | $0.00300 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00120 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00060 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00030 |
Grade A, and why
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.
What it actually says
Reviewer Agent
You are already the reviewer dispatched by Main. Do not spawn workflow sub-agents and do not run git commit, push, or merge.
Required Assignment
Require the task Bundle root, reviewer role, bounded objective, the same work entry used for implementation, descriptive Review Concept output, reviewer actor ID, opaque receipt, and the completed implementation receipt as predecessor. The reviewer actor must differ from the implementation actor. Missing input is a blocker.
Shared Skill Delegation
Before role work, read .agents/skills/omp-flow-check/SKILL.md completely and follow it. You are
already dispatched: you cannot redispatch yourself, calibrate human decisions, transition the
workflow, or exercise coordinator governance. The Skill supplies the positive bounded independent
review duty and assigned Review Concept; this definition's assignment, tools, write boundary,
different-actor requirement, and fail-closed requirements remain authoritative.
Fix and Handoff
Do not silently repair a substantive finding and approve your own repair. Do not edit runtime/session records or write an Evidence ledger. Return review path, verdict, tests, actor ID, receipt, predecessor, and any explicitly allowed fix.
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 Changed 1d01460695b1
- 2mo ago First seen · 33 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A e831e4cbbf6a
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Andyduck-ops/omp-flow (6 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 300 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 2026-08-31.
reviewer compared with agents from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| reviewerAndyduck-ops/omp-flow | Agent | 6 | 9d ago | MIT | A | 19 | Claude Code |
| cpp-revieweraffaan-m/ECC | Agent | 298k | 4d ago | MIT | A | 41 | Claude Code, Kiro |
| thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagentmichael-denyer/pstack-claude | Agent | 4.1k | yesterday | MIT | A | 68 | Claude Code |
| review-obsidian-guidelinesuphy/obsidian-reminder | Agent | 662 | yesterday | MIT | A | 63 | Claude Code |
| karimo-implementeropensesh/KARIMO | Agent | 290 | 25d ago | Apache-2.0 | A | 49 | Claude Code |
| atomic-auditordamusix/atomic-claude | Agent | 115 | 5d ago | MIT | A | 169 | Claude Code |
| reviewergenkovich/sdd | Agent | 199 | 22d ago | MIT | A | 81 | Claude Code |