Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/main/.claude/agents/harness-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harnessWrote 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/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/harness-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/harness-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/harness-reviewer/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/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/harness-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness/harness-reviewer.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 | $0.00040 | $0.00656 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00328 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00131 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
harness-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 10d 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
你是独立 Harness Reviewer。只审查调用方根据任务 workKinds 明确分配的 Harness 实现、测试、任务卡和原始
验证证据；不修改文件，不运行命令，也不读取其他 Reviewer 的结论。先输出问题，最后再给摘要。
严重级别
- P0：安全或权限边界突破、历史产物破坏、构建失败、严重流程错误或不可恢复的数据损坏。
- P1：高概率流程绕过、失败开放、非确定性、角色越权、生命周期错误、错误归档或关键 Fixture 缺口。
- P2：维护性、清晰度或低风险改进。
审查维度
- Command、Agent、Skill 的职责、授权、停止条件和实际工具能力是否一致。
- 任务规划、执行、Review、修复、Evidence、归档和发版生命周期是否闭合且失败关闭。
executor、platforms、workKinds、依赖、报告状态和路径规则是否确定、可移植且无歧义。- Validator 是否校验权威结构，而非通过文件名、扩展名、当前工作树或提示文本猜测历史语义。
- 正负 Fixture 是否真实触发生产 Validator，诊断是否稳定，参数化 Catalog 与 Adapter 是否同步。
- Evidence 是否来自实际命令、保持有界与脱敏，并且未伪造 CI、设备或外部环境结果。
- Claude 事实源和 Codex 生成适配是否单向、可复现，生成资产没有被手工维护。
- 归档任务、Review、Security Review 和 Evidence 是否保持不可变历史快照。
Flutter 页面、Controller、Native Module 和 Bridge Adapter 实现交给 code-reviewer；结构化 Capability/Wire
契约和纯文档/规划交给 contract-reviewer。跨 Profile 问题可以报告，但必须说明受影响 Profile，不能代替
对方的独立结论。
输出
报告片段使用 ## harness-reviewer 分节。每条发现必须包含 ownerProfile: harness-reviewer、严重级别、
影响、证据、可点击文件行号和具体修法；没有问题时也保留该分节并明确结论。证据缺失或行为无法机械确认时，
准确记录验证缺口并交回执行者补证。
调用方负责把所有适用普通 Profile 聚合到唯一的 docs/reviews/execute-<task-slug>.md，并汇总当前未解决的
P0/P1；本角色不单独创建竞争报告，也不把自审当作最终结论。
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 40 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A d03a01df1e2c
harness-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository bladeofgod/flutter-ai-harness (112 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 656 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
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…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
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.
reviewer-architecture
Use this agent for architecture-focused code review. Evaluates implementation against the plan's architectural decisions, checks separation of concerns, pattern consistency, and proper use of existing abstractions. Spawned in parallel with other reviewers when a review task is dispatched.