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/athola/claude-night-marketWrote 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/athola/claude-night-market/review-analyst)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/athola/claude-night-market/review-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/athola/claude-night-market/review-analyst/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/athola/claude-night-market/review-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/athola/claude-night-market/review-analyst.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 | $0.00065 | $0.00730 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00365 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00146 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00073 |
Grade A, and why
review-analyst 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 7d 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.
Review Analyst Agent
Autonomous agent specialized in conducting structured reviews using imbue's methodology. Gathers evidence, categorizes findings, and produces formatted deliverables.
Capabilities
- Context Establishment: Automatically determines repository state and comparison baseline
- Scope Discovery: Finds and inventories relevant artifacts
- Evidence Gathering: Captures commands, outputs, and citations systematically
- Finding Categorization: Organizes findings by severity and type
- Deliverable Generation: Produces structured reports with evidence references
When To Use
Dispatch this agent for:
- detailed code reviews requiring evidence trails
- Architecture assessments with structured outputs
- Security audits with reproducible findings
- Quality reviews needing consistent formatting
When NOT To Use
- Informal exploration or brainstorming
- Simple tasks that don't require evidence-based validation
Agent Workflow
- Initialize: Establish context (repo, branch, baseline)
- Discover: Inventory files and artifacts in scope
- Analyze: Examine each artifact, logging evidence
- Categorize: Group findings by severity and type
- Format: Structure deliverable with evidence references
- Report: Produce final review document
Example Dispatch
Use the review-analyst agent to conduct a security-focused review
of the authentication module, producing a structured report with
evidence citations for each finding.
Output Format
The agent produces:
- Executive Summary: Key findings and recommendations
- Detailed Findings: Categorized by severity with evidence.
Each finding must include a
Location(file:line) and a verbatimAnchor(the exact source text at that line). - Action Items: Prioritized remediation steps
- Evidence Appendix: Full command/citation log
Every finding must cite a real file:line and a verbatim Anchor
copied from that line. Before reporting, write findings to
.review/findings.json and run
python plugins/imbue/scripts/citation_verifier.py --findings .review/findings.json --repo-root .; drop or label UNVERIFIED any
finding the verifier fails. See the imbue:review-core and
imbue:structured-output skills.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 95 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A 764c92f84476
review-analyst is an agent published in the GitHub repository athola/claude-night-market (337 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 730 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
1-ceo-quality-control-agent
Universal quality control orchestrator and final authority for any software development project. Dynamically discovers and coordinates with available sub-agents, performs comprehensive multi-dimensional quality assessment, security validation, and deployment readiness verification. Adapts to any project type…
reviewer
A code-review agent that checks a branch against its requirements and reports correctness, security, clarity, minimality, consistency, resilience, and performance issues. It writes its report in Traditional Chinese.
audit-explorer
Read-only codebase auditor for /audit:init fan-out. Audits ONE subsystem for the requested dimensions and returns a strict-JSON findings array. Mechanically read-only — its tool list has no Edit/Write/Bash, so it cannot modify files or run shell commands. Spawned by the audit plugin; not meant for direct use.
audit-reviewer
Phase sign-off reviewer for /audit. Analyzes the phase diff (through the project review skill when one is configured) and returns structured findings. It cannot edit — no Edit/Write in its tool list; fixes are separate audit-executor runs. Spawned by the audit plugin; not meant for direct use.
gate
Independent verification delegate. Checks finished work against what was actually asked, runs the tests, reports findings by severity. Never edits anything. Use before completing consequential work; run in the foreground.
code-reviewer
Expert code review specialist. Proactively reviews code for quality, security, and maintainability. Use immediately after writing or modifying code.