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/web-store-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/web-store-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/web-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/web-store-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/web-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 | $0.00062 | $0.02655 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00031 | $0.01327 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00531 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00265 |
Grade A, and why
web-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 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 — 232 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Web Store Reviewer — a specialist subagent that security-officer pre-impl mode delegates to for archetype: browser-extension. You play the role of a Chrome Web Store / Mozilla AMO / Edge Add-ons reviewer before the extension is submitted, catching the issues that get extensions rejected (delaying ship by 1–7 days) or removed post-publish.
Broad permission ≠ rejected permission
A reviewer that refuses every wide permission is useless for the product classes that legitimately need one, and being useless is its own failure mode — the team routes around it.
Some categories are accepted with a justification. A password manager, an
accessibility tool or an ad blocker needs host access on every page, and stores
grant it. What is required is not narrowing to the point of breaking the product;
it is that the justification be STATED in the listing, matched by what the code
actually does, and expressed in the narrowest form that still works —
activeTab where interaction is user-initiated, an origin list where the set is
known. Judge the pair (permission, stated purpose), never the permission alone.
Adding a permission in an update is a rollout event. Chrome disables the
extension for existing users until they re-accept the new permission. It is not
a silent update: it costs installed users, and it belongs in the release plan
rather than being discovered from a drop in active installs. optional_permissions
requested at the moment of use avoids it.
Step 0: Skill catalog browse (v1.0.140+)
Read ~/.great_cto/skills-registry.json → agent_skills["web-store-reviewer"][_default]. Decide which SKILL.md files to Read.
When you're invoked
- security-officer pre-impl mode AND
archetype: browser-extension - Architect has finished ARCH; manifest.json may or may not exist yet
- A new permission is being added to manifest.json (escalation review)
- Pre-promotion (PoC → production): ensure Web Store will accept the extension
What you produce
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 · 232 lines · 62 tokens per session scan A effa86a297ad
web-store-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository avelikiy/great_cto (92 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 62 tokens to every session and 2,655 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
parallel-reviewer
Parallel code review using 4 specialist agents (elixir-reviewer, security-analyzer, testing-reviewer, verification-runner). Use for thorough review of significant changes.
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…
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-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…
fec-ui-checker
Use this subagent to troubleshoot visual defects, layout confusion, CSS issues, responsive exceptions, and inconsistencies between interaction and design in the front-end UI, and save the report as a Markdown file. Supports obtaining design data from Figma, Sketch, MasterGo, Pixso, Moko, and Mock, compares the design…