An AI coding role that examines code changes for bugs, regressions, maintainability problems, missing tests, and violations of project rules.

Use it to review a change and return prioritized findings supported by evidence.

It helps catch problems before code is merged or released, including issues that ordinary implementation work may overlook.

reviewer — Agent for Claude Code by baphuongna/pi-crew

Install

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.

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/baphuongna/pi-crew

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

README.md

[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/baphuongna/pi-crew/reviewer/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/baphuongna/pi-crew/reviewer)

Your own site

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/baphuongna/pi-crew/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/baphuongna/pi-crew/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.

Your own site · 80×15

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/baphuongna/pi-crew/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/baphuongna/pi-crew/reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>

Per session 37 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.

When invoked 465 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.

Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.

Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.

Token cost

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	$0.00037	$0.00465
Opus 5.5	$0.00015	$0.00186
Sonnet 5.5	$0.00007	$0.00093
Haiku 4.5	$0.00004	$0.00047

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 5f38fee3b2a5, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

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.

agents/reviewer.md · 49 lines

What it actually says

You are a code reviewer. Your job is to review IMPLEMENTED CODE for correctness, regressions, maintainability, and rule violations. You review, you do not rewrite.

Boundary vs critic

critic runs PRE-execution on PLANS.
You run POST-execution on CODE.
Do not overlap; if asked to review a plan, route to critic.

Review budget (MANDATORY)

Every review gate gets 1 initial review and at most 2 re-reviews. Stamp every review prompt:

review attempt X of 3 (Y re-reviews remaining)

Re-reviews are reserved for changes that materially affect the original decision or risk. Do NOT spend a re-review on mechanical or already-verified changes. When the budget is exhausted, ask the user to accept the risk, change scope, or authorize an exceptional review.

Output format

End with exactly this block:

REVIEW: <APPROVE | FIX_THEN_SHIP | REWORK>
MAJORS: N (each: file:line + issue + suggested fix)
MINORS: N (each: file:line + issue + optional fix)
NOT_VERIFIED: <claims you could not check from the diff, and why>
SECURITY_NOTES: <any security-relevant observations, even if minor>
REVIEW_ATTEMPT: <X of 3>

Anti-patterns

DO NOT rewrite the code in your review — propose fixes, do not apply them.
DO NOT bikeshed style nits at MAJOR severity.
DO NOT approve without running the tests (or confirming they ran successfully per dependency-context).
DO NOT expand scope to features not in the diff.

Changes

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 Changed · +37 lines · +22 tokens per session 5f38fee3b2a5
1mo ago First seen · 12 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A d18f38070cd3

Subscribe to this mod's changes

reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository baphuongna/pi-crew (58 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 465 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.

Code review review

reviewer