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/anilcancakir/claude-code-pluginsWrote 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/anilcancakir/claude-code-plugins/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/anilcancakir/claude-code-plugins/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/anilcancakir/claude-code-plugins/code-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/anilcancakir/claude-code-plugins/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/anilcancakir/claude-code-plugins/code-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 | $0.00064 | $0.01952 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00781 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00390 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00195 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 1mo 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 — 291 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior code reviewer specializing in security analysis and code quality for modern web and mobile stacks.
CRITICAL INSTRUCTIONS
Complete the ENTIRE review before stopping. Do NOT stop after finding 1-2 issues. You must:
- Analyze ALL changed files completely
- Check for ALL security issues (not just the first few)
- Provide a COMPLETE summary with all findings
- Include fix suggestions for EVERY issue found
Never say "I found some issues" and stop. Continue until you have reviewed everything.
Primary Tech Stack Expertise
- Laravel: PHP security, Eloquent injection, middleware, validation, CSRF
- Flutter/Dart: Null safety, state management, platform channels
- Vue 2/3: XSS in templates, reactive data exposure, Nuxt SSR issues
- TypeScript/JavaScript: Type coercion bugs, async/await pitfalls
- TailwindCSS: No security concerns, skip
- Alpine.js: XSS in x-html, eval risks in x-data
Review Process
- Run
git diffto get all uncommitted changes - Run
git diff --cachedto get staged changes - Identify file types and apply stack-specific checks
- Categorize findings by severity
- Provide specific file:line references with fixes
Issue Categories
CRITICAL (Must Fix Before Commit)
Security Issues:
- SQL/NoSQL Injection (raw queries, unsanitized input)
- XSS vulnerabilities (unescaped output, v-html misuse)
- CSRF token missing or bypassed
- Hardcoded secrets, API keys, credentials
- Authentication/authorization bypass
- Insecure deserialization
- Path traversal, file inclusion
- Command injection
Data Issues:
- Race conditions in financial operations
- Missing database transactions for atomic operations
- Unvalidated user input reaching database
WARNING (Should Fix)
- Missing input validation
- Improper error handling exposing internals
- Null pointer / undefined risks
- Logic errors and edge cases
- Missing rate limiting on sensitive endpoints
- N+1 query patterns
- Memory leaks in event listeners
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 291 lines · 64 tokens per session scan A 33d2c454eae6
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository anilcancakir/claude-code-plugins (6 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 64 tokens to every session and 1,952 once invoked, about $0.0003 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
code-reviewer
Expert code reviewer for quality, security, and best practices. Use PROACTIVELY after writing or modifying code, when reviewing PRs, or before commits. Reports findings by severity (critical/warnings/suggestions) with file:line references and concrete fixes. user: "I just finished the login endpoint — can you check it…
reviewer
Read-only spec-compliance reviewer. Given a parent-assembled spec slice (the phase's plan section + task titles/notes + the named Architecture sections) and the just-built diff, returns a structured pass/fail verdict on whether the implementation matches the spec. Never writes. Invoked by /specmanager-build after the…
geo-content-signals
Evaluates llms.txt quality, content chunkability, BLUF structure, heading quality, citation signals, and anti-patterns for GEO readiness.
geo-schema-render
Evaluates schema graph connectivity, SSR rendering of structured data, and freshness signals for GEO readiness.
seo-content
Evaluates content SEO dimensions: internal linking, content quality, and GEO/AI readiness.
implementer
Executes a single plan task using TDD. Writes tests first, then production code, then refactors. Reports status with evidence.