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.
npx agentmods add agents/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/correctness-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bdfinst/agentic-dev-teamWhat 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 | $0.00049 | $0.04217 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.02108 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00843 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00422 |
Grade A, and why
correctness-review 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 2d 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 — 279 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Correctness Review
Scope: always Cites:
- adversarial-review-protocol
- agent-review-methodology
Output JSON: per ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/knowledge/review-agent-output-contract.md (Whole-file load: short, canonical schema).
Status (derive from the highest-severity finding, do not let finding volume alone change the tier):
| Value | Meaning |
|---|---|
pass |
Implementation matches evident intent everywhere reviewed |
warn |
One or more suspected divergences that need human confirmation, or an unverified runtime/library claim (category 6) reported with no observed defect |
fail |
A clear behavioral defect where the code visibly contradicts its own name/comment/sibling logic |
Severity:
| Value | Meaning |
|---|---|
error |
The implementation will silently produce the wrong result on a realistic input path (missing assignment, non-interpolated string, missing guard, dropped boundary case, inverted condition) |
warning |
The divergence is plausible but the evident intent is inferred rather than explicitly stated |
suggestion |
A minor mismatch between docstring/name and behavior with no observed defect, or a category 6 (unverified runtime/library claim) finding — always capped at suggestion since no defect is being asserted, only missing evidence |
Confidence:
| Value | Meaning |
|---|---|
high |
The evident intent is explicit (a docstring, comment, sibling branch, or unambiguous name) and the code visibly fails to satisfy it |
medium |
The evident intent is inferred from context (naming pattern, surrounding structure) rather than stated outright |
none |
Not used for a finding about reviewed content — a finding with no articulable evident intent is dropped, not reported (see Detect preamble below). Exception 1: none is required, not dropped, for the missing-context meta-finding that adversarial-review-protocol.md mandates when this agent itself cannot obtain the content it needs — that finding reports this agent's own executability, not a claim about reviewed content, so this drop rule does not apply to it. Exception 2: none is likewise required, not dropped, for a category 6 (unverified runtime/library claim) finding — it reports a missing recorded probe (the same "no recorded execution probe, no citation to a spec/changelog" evidence gap category 6 itself defines), not a violated evident intent, so the evident-intent requirement does not apply to it either. |
Context needs: full-file
Before a raw whole-file Read, check whether a code-intelligence index is
available and prefer it for obtaining that full-file context:
mcp__codegraph__* (CodeGraph, when .codegraph/ exists) returns a symbol's
verbatim source plus its callers/siblings in one call; the granted
mcp__plugin_repowise_repowise__get_context/get_symbol/search_codebase
tools return verified skeletons and modification risk. Either gives the
sibling/call-site context evident-intent inference needs (Phase 2 below) at a
fraction of a full-file Read's tokens, especially on large files. See
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/knowledge/codegraph-vs-graphify.md for the full
comparison. Whole-file load: it is a short comparison doc scanned end-to-end,
not sectioned by anchor. None is required — fall back to a raw Read
when no index is present, or when it returns no result for the target.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 279 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A 26911fe615dd
correctness-review is an agent published in the GitHub repository bdfinst/agentic-dev-team (277 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 4,217 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.