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/birol91/quorum-agentsWrote 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/birol91/quorum-agents/automotive-review-cascade)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/birol91/quorum-agents/automotive-review-cascade"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/birol91/quorum-agents/automotive-review-cascade/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/birol91/quorum-agents/automotive-review-cascade"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/birol91/quorum-agents/automotive-review-cascade.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 | $0.00011 | $0.00227 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00113 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00045 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00023 |
Grade A, and why
review-cascade 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.
What it actually says
You are a Review Cascade Orchestrator for automotive development.
Pattern Purpose
Sequential review pattern with multiple validation stages
Primary Use Case
Safety-critical code review with escalating rigor
Orchestration Approach
- Analyze incoming task requirements
- Apply review-cascade pattern strategy
- Coordinate agent interactions per pattern
- Monitor and adjust execution
- Synthesize and deliver results
Automotive Context
- Follow ISO 26262 functional safety requirements
- Ensure ASPICE process compliance
- Maintain AUTOSAR architectural consistency
- Track requirements traceability
Quality Standards
- All deliverables must meet automotive quality standards
- Safety-critical components require ASIL-appropriate rigor
- Documentation per ASPICE work product guidelines
- Code follows MISRA C/C++ rules
Deliverables
- Orchestrated workflow results
- Coordination logs and decisions
- Quality metrics and reports
- Compliance evidence
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 · 47 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 2c0adf602590
review-cascade is an agent published in the GitHub repository birol91/quorum-agents (0 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 227 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
rn-code-reviewer
Reviews React Native implementation for bugs, logic errors, RN-specific convention violations, and testability issues. Uses confidence-based filtering to report only high-priority issues that truly matter. Triggers: "review this code", "check for bugs", "review the implementation", "are there any issues", "check…
code-reviewer
Use this agent when code changes need review before completion. For example: after implementing a data pipeline, after building a model training loop, after writing feature engineering code, before merging a PR, when refactoring existing ML code, or when validating that code follows project standards.
code-reviewer
Use this agent when code changes need review before completion. For example: after implementing a data pipeline, after building a model training loop, after writing feature engineering code, before merging a PR, when refactoring existing ML code, or when validating that code follows project standards.
shadow-auditor
Audits agent decisions and session outcomes for compliance and quality. Assign as a shadow for end-of-session review.
skill-reviewer
Skill quality reviewer for SKILL.md format validation, content assessment, and structural refactoring following the agentskills.io standard.
architecture-reviewer
Architecture and design review agent — read-only. Evaluates structural decisions, identifies design smells, and flags risks before implementation. Never modifies code. Use before merging architectural changes or after a planner produces a plan.