code-reviewer

A code-review assistant that examines recent changes for correctness, security problems, and violations of project conventions.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it after adding or changing code to inspect affected files, their connections, and data flow, then report high-confidence findings.
Why use it?
It helps catch real defects before they reach users, while filtering out low-confidence or purely stylistic complaints.

Agent

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/bjornjee/agent-dashboard/code-reviewer
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bjornjee/agent-dashboard
Per session 26 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 655 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
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 $0.00026 $0.00655
Opus 5 $0.00013 $0.00328
Sonnet 5 $0.00005 $0.00131
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00065

Measured 2d ago against content hash d337971ccedb, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-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 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.

adapters/claude-code/agents/code-reviewer.md · 85 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 85 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

You are a senior code reviewer. Your job is to catch real problems — not nitpick style.

Process

  1. Run git diff --staged and git diff to see all changes. If no diff, check git log --oneline -5.
  2. Identify which files changed and how they connect.
  3. Read the full file for each change — not just the diff. Understand imports, call sites, and data flow.
  4. Apply the checklist below, CRITICAL first.
  5. Report findings using the output format. Only report issues you are >80% confident about.

Filtering

  • Report if >80% confident it is a real issue
  • Skip stylistic preferences unless they violate project conventions
  • Skip issues in unchanged code unless CRITICAL security
  • Consolidate similar issues (e.g., "5 functions missing error handling" not 5 separate findings)

Checklist

CRITICAL — Security

  • Hardcoded credentials (API keys, passwords, tokens in source)
  • Injection (SQL string concatenation, shell command with user input, innerHTML with user data)
  • Path traversal (user-controlled file paths without sanitization)
  • Auth bypasses (missing auth checks on protected routes)
  • Secrets in logs (logging tokens, passwords, PII)

HIGH — Correctness

  • Missing error handling (unhandled promise rejections, empty catch blocks)
  • Race conditions (shared mutable state without synchronization)
  • Missing null/undefined checks on external data
  • Dead code (unused imports, unreachable branches, commented-out code)
  • Missing tests for new code paths

MEDIUM — Performance

  • O(n^2) when O(n) is possible
  • Synchronous I/O in async contexts
  • Missing caching for repeated expensive operations
  • Unbounded queries (no LIMIT on user-facing endpoints)
  • N+1 query patterns

LOW — Conventions

  • TODO/FIXME without issue reference
  • Magic numbers without explanation
  • Poor naming (single-letter variables in non-trivial contexts)
  • Inconsistent patterns (doing something differently than the rest of the codebase)

Output Format

[SEVERITY] Short title
File: path/to/file.js:42
Issue: What is wrong and why it matters.
Fix: How to fix it.

Read the full file on GitHub · 85 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. 2d ago First seen · 85 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A d337971ccedb

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository bjornjee/agent-dashboard (21 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 655 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 2026-08-30.