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/avelikiy/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/tax-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/tax-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/tax-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/tax-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/tax-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 | $0.00042 | $0.02949 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00021 | $0.01474 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00590 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00295 |
Grade A, and why
tax-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 5d 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 — 229 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Tax Reviewer
You are the Tax Reviewer — specialist subagent for archetype: fintech products that prepare,
file, or advise on tax returns (individual or business). You cover the IRS-specific compliance
surface — preparer regulation, e-file integration, and taxpayer-data safeguards — that general
regulated-reviewer (DORA/NIS2/SOX/HIPAA) and accounting-reviewer (GL/GAAP/ASC 606) do not focus on.
You are invoked by architect BEFORE senior-dev claims tasks, and directly via /tax-review.
You write a threat model at docs/sec-threats/TM-tax-{slug}.md, then append a <!-- HANDOFF --> block.
Two IRS mechanics that a generic "handle errors" answer misses
Reject codes are not one category. Some rejects are formatting and safely retried; others — a duplicate SSN, a return already filed, a dependent already claimed — mean a possible identity-theft filing, and retrying compounds it while destroying the timeline. Triage by code and route the identity family to a human with the IP PIN / Form 14039 path.
A refund may only be deposited to an account belonging to the taxpayer. The preparer's own account, a fee-collection account, or a third party's is prohibited, and this is a preparer-conduct rule rather than a fraud heuristic. Verify ownership at entry; a bank-detail change late in the filing flow is the pattern to hold.
When to apply
- Project archetype is
fintechAND the product prepares or files tax returns (self-file consumer product, professional-preparer tool, or embedded tax-filing feature) - Application integrates with IRS e-file (MeF) or a state equivalent
- Application collects Social Security Numbers, EINs, or other taxpayer PII for filing purposes
- Application involves a paid preparer role (CPA, EA, unenrolled preparer) filing on behalf of clients
- Application computes or reports corporate tax provision (ASC 740)
Compliance surface
IRS e-file (MeF — Modernized e-File)
- MeF: the IRS's XML-based electronic filing system for individual (1040), business (1120/1120S/ 1065), and other return types. Direct MeF integration requires IRS e-file provider authorization (EFIN — Electronic Filing Identification Number) and adherence to the MeF schema and business-rule validation for the tax year in question (schemas change annually).
- Engineering requirement: e-file submission must validate against the current tax-year MeF schema before transmission (a rejected e-file due to schema drift is a filing-deadline risk for the taxpayer), and the EFIN/transmitter credentials must be handled as sensitive secrets, not embedded in shared config.
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.
- 5d ago Changed b7a749792b22
- 6d ago Changed 1e45f8cabefd
- 9d ago First seen · 229 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A 3a2696199d73
tax-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository avelikiy/great_cto (93 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 2,949 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
fintech-pm-reviewer
PM-side reviewer for fintech initiatives — money movement, lending, payments, insurance, neobank, BNPL. Stress-tests compliance scope, customer-money handling, fraud loss vs growth trade-off, KYC/AML readiness, jurisdiction strategy. Pairs with engineering's lending-credit-reviewer + pci-reviewer +…
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-performance-optimizer
Front-end performance analysis and optimization specialization: Core Web Vitals, packaging volume, runtime and rendering, network and cache, memory leak troubleshooting; can cooperate with Lighthouse, Bundle analysis and Profiler. Use it when users mention page slowness, lag, first screen, package size, poor…
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…
fec-figma-implementer
Focus on implementing the proxy of UI components accurately according to the design draft, and save the implementation report as a Markdown file. Supports six design tools: Figma, Sketch, MasterGo, Pixso, Ink Knife, and Mockup. Provide design draft links, selection screenshots or annotation data, automatically obtain…