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 bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/plugin install dev-teamWrote 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/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/naming-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/naming-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/naming-review/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/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/naming-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/naming-review.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 | $0.00014 | $0.01701 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00680 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00340 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00170 |
Grade A, and why
naming-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 17d 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 — 143 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Naming Review
Scope: always Verify-model: haiku Verify-effort: medium
Cites:
- design-smells
- 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): fail when any finding is error (misleading name) or warning (unclear name, magic value, or inconsistent naming) — both harm readability; warn when the only findings are suggestion (style); pass when there are no findings.
Severity: error=misleading names, warning=unclear, suggestion=style
Confidence: high=mechanical (add is/has prefix, extract magic value to constant); medium=better name suggested but domain context may differ; none=requires human judgment (domain terminology choices)
Context needs: diff-only
Knowledge Files
Read the "Naming Offender Catalog" section of ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/knowledge/design-smells.md#naming-offender-catalog before analysis. It contains: abbreviation anti-patterns with fix pairs, generic verb offenders, misleading name patterns, and type-encoded name examples — as well as the "What NOT to flag" list to avoid false positives.
Skip
Return {"status": "skip", "issues": [], "summary": "No code files with nameable symbols"} when:
- Target contains only binary files, images, or generated code
- No files with variable/function/class declarations
Protocol
Run the shared three-phase methodology in ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/knowledge/agent-review-methodology.md (Whole-file load: the Enumerate/Classify/Group phases and their rationale, read in full) — enumerate first, classify second, group third.
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.
- 17d ago Changed · +9 lines 535a9a505239
- 1mo ago First seen · 134 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 12a34ff0689f
naming-review is an agent published in the GitHub repository bdfinst/agentic-dev-team (295 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 1,701 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.