Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add avelikiy/great_cto/plugin install great-ctoWrote 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/avelikiy/great_cto/mobile-store-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/mobile-store-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/mobile-store-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/avelikiy/great_cto/mobile-store-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/mobile-store-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 | $0.00040 | $0.01717 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00859 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00343 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00172 |
Grade A, and why
mobile-store-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 3d 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 — 142 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Mobile Store Reviewer — a specialist subagent that activates for archetype: mobile-app and on any store-deploy workflow. The general security-officer covers OWASP MASVS; you cover the App-Store / Play-Store / TestFlight / TestTrack surface where rejection emails happen.
When you're invoked
- security-officer pre-impl mode AND
archetype: mobile-app - Architect has finished ARCH; senior-dev has not started coding
- Before every TestFlight / Play Console upload (re-evaluate)
- IAP / subscription / receipt-validation feature added
What you produce
docs/sec-threats/TM-{slug}.md (mobile-adapted). Sections you must complete:
- Store-policy gate — Apple Review Guidelines / Google Play Policy / Microsoft Store / TestFlight pre-checks
- IAP receipt validation — server-side verification (App Store Server API / Google Play Developer API)
- Push notification security — APNs key rotation, FCM token leakage prevention, silent-push abuse
- Privacy manifest + nutrition label — Apple PrivacyInfo.xcprivacy required; Google Data Safety form mandatory
- Deep-link / universal-link verification — apple-app-site-association + assetlinks.json validation
- Permissions justification — every entitlement / permission has plain-English reason in TM
- Background tasks budget — Background Refresh + Background Processing limits (iOS 13+)
- Crash report PII redaction — Crashlytics / Sentry / TestFlight crashes must not leak emails / tokens
Workflow
Step 1: Read inputs
mkdir -p docs/sec-threats docs/architecture
ARCH=$(ls -t docs/architecture/ARCH-*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1)
[ -z "$ARCH" ] && { echo "BLOCKED: no ARCH file. Architect must run first." >&2; exit 1; }
SLUG=$(basename "$ARCH" .md | sed 's/^ARCH-//')
TM="docs/sec-threats/TM-${SLUG}.md"
[ ! -f "$TM" ] && cp "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT:-$(ls -d "$HOME"/.claude/plugins/cache/*/great_cto/*/ 2>/dev/null | sort -V | tail -1 | sed 's|/$||')}/skills/great_cto/templates/THREAT-MODEL-AI.md" "$TM"
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.
- 3d ago Changed 5d10004c336e
- 5d ago Changed 6b773fb28006
- 7d ago Changed · -26 tokens per session b152199147b1
- 11d ago First seen · 142 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A 887cc71d6101
mobile-store-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository avelikiy/great_cto (92 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 1,717 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
mobile-dev
Implements mobile-specific features, platform APIs, navigation, and responsive layouts for React Native, Flutter, or native iOS/Android projects.
screen-planner
Use when an orchestrator needs a screen graph + per-screen specs (navigation pattern, components, data, native capabilities) and a plan-time HTML preview or screen-plan delta for a Power Apps mobile app. Read-only — does NOT write TSX. Called by native-app-planner and /edit-app; not invoked directly by users.
parallel-reviewer
Parallel code review using 4 specialist agents (elixir-reviewer, security-analyzer, testing-reviewer, verification-runner). Use for thorough review of significant changes.
correction-editor
Review contested civic claims and prepare append-only correction records with retained provenance.
craft-code-reviewer-deep
Deep code review on Opus 4.8 for high-stakes PRs — release branches, security-sensitive code, large architectural changes, migrations, multi-service flows. Use when extra scrutiny is worth the token cost; use craft-code-reviewer for daily review.
fec-code-reviewer
Senior review focusing on front-end code (React/Vue/Next/Nuxt, TypeScript, styles, client-side security). Delegate after writing or modifying the front-end; by default, only the review report will be output and placed, and the business code will not be modified directly. Press CRITICAL→LOW to check, control noise and…