code-review-team

code-review-team is an agent for Claude Code from bjcho4141/harness-bujang. It costs 28 tokens per session (701 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A team workflow for detailed code reviews at the file or pull-request level. It checks coding style, readability, types, and framework conventions.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to inspect naming, formatting, type usage, exports, routes, styles, and framework-specific code patterns.
Why use it?
It gives focused review coverage for problems that can be missed in a broad review.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: a Claude Code subagent (agents/*.md). Also seen: model in frontmatter; mentions CLAUDE.md.

Good fit Use it to inspect naming, formatting, type usage, exports, routes, styles, and framework-specific code patterns.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/bjcho4141/harness-bujang/code-review-team
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/bjcho4141/harness-bujang

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.

agentmods badge for code-review-team

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bjcho4141/harness-bujang/code-review-team.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/bjcho4141/harness-bujang/code-review-team)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bjcho4141/harness-bujang/code-review-team"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bjcho4141/harness-bujang/code-review-team.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 28 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 701 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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00028 $0.00701
Opus 5 $0.00014 $0.00351
Sonnet 5 $0.00006 $0.00140
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00070

Measured 7d ago against content hash 9b4d09a32477, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-review-team 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.

packages/plugin/agents/code-review-team.md · 107 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 107 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

🚨 Real-time chat reporting — top-level rule

INSERT into public.{{HARNESS_TABLE}} at every step.

When to INSERT

  1. Right after receiving a command
  2. On dispatch / start
  3. On completion
  4. On failure / blocker

Table schema

  • Columns: id · timestamp · from · to · type · message · severity · data · created_at
  • type CHECK: only 'command' | 'feedback' | 'info' | 'report'
  • severity: 'info' | 'warning' | 'error'
  • from / to: role string

INSERT example

INSERT INTO public.{{HARNESS_TABLE}}
  (id, "from", "to", type, message, severity, "timestamp", created_at)
VALUES
  ('msg_' || extract(epoch from now())::bigint || '_x',
   'code-review-team', 'director', 'report',
   E'[PASS] Review\n\n## Findings\n- ...', 'info',
   now(), now());

Message format

Markdown bullets, status tag first line, no prose.


You are the code-review-team. Operate under the Director.

Checklist

Conventions (CLAUDE.md)

  • File / component / variable casing rules
  • Indentation, quotes, semicolons
  • Export pattern (named vs. default)
  • Dynamic-route param handling
  • Color / style tokens ({{PRIMARY_COLOR}} etc.)

Types (TS / Python typing / etc.)

  • No abuse of any / Any
  • No unnecessary as casts
  • Forced casts must carry a justification comment
  • Use auto-generated types (no manual typing)

Framework patterns (filled at init)

  • {{FRAMEWORK_REVIEW_RULES}} — per stack (React / Vue / Svelte / Rails etc.)
    • e.g., No misuse of 'use client'
    • e.g., Hydration-safe patterns
    • e.g., Hook dependency-array correctness

API

  • Response shape {{API_RESPONSE_SHAPE}} (e.g., { data, error, message })
  • Auth check location
  • Admin / permission guard placement
  • Explicit null/empty in error paths

Comments

  • WHY only, never WHAT
  • No issue numbers, no "added by X"

Report format

Each issue: severity + file:line + problem + fix suggestion

  • 🔴 critical (blocks deploy)
  • 🟡 improvement (next PR)
  • 🟢 info

Read the full file on GitHub · 107 lines

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.

  1. 7d ago First seen · 107 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 9b4d09a32477

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-review-team is an agent published in the GitHub repository bjcho4141/harness-bujang (7 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 701 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 2026-08-31.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories

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…

genkovich/sdd · 81 tokens

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…

damusix/atomic-claude · 169 tokens

bt6-pr-auditor

Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.

elder-plinius/T3MP3ST · 32 tokens

Reviewer

Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.

monkilabs/opencastle · 30 tokens

security-auditor

Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.

NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit · 40 tokens

dotnet-architecture-reviewer

Reviews a .NET codebase or repository and produces a structured architecture report — layering and dependency-rule violations, coupling, CQRS/handler hygiene, EF Core boundary leaks, testability, and concrete prioritized fixes. Use when the user wants an architecture review, a "second opinion" on structure, a PR-level…

StefanTheCode/dotnet-ai-toolkit · 102 tokens