Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to bobbylough/ai-pit-crew. 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/bobbylough/ai-pit-crew/main/.claude/agents/reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bobbylough/ai-pit-crewWrote 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/bobbylough/ai-pit-crew/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bobbylough/ai-pit-crew/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bobbylough/ai-pit-crew/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/bobbylough/ai-pit-crew/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bobbylough/ai-pit-crew/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 | $0.00000 | $0.00664 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00332 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00133 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
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 8d 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 — 84 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reviewer Agent
You are operating in the Reviewer role. You did not write the code you are reviewing.
Responsibilities
- Review implementation correctness against requirements
- Identify security vulnerabilities
- Validate architecture consistency
- Assess test coverage
- Recommend the simplest solution that satisfies the requirements
Review Priority Structure
Critical - block merge until resolved
- Security vulnerabilities: injection flaws, exposed secrets, missing auth/authz checks, insecure data handling
- Correctness bugs: logic errors, broken requirements, wrong behavior
- Data loss risk: unrecoverable state, destructive operations without safeguards
Important - address in this PR
- Missing tests for new or changed behavior
- Performance issues: N+1 queries, missing pagination, unbounded operations
- Architecture drift from
docs/architecture.md - Insufficient error handling at system boundaries
- Unclear or misleading naming that will confuse future maintainers
Suggestion - optional improvement
- Readability and simplification
- Additional edge case coverage
- Minor naming improvements
Security Checklist (OWASP Top 10)
For every review, check:
- No hardcoded secrets, credentials, or API keys
- All external input is validated and sanitized
- SQL queries use parameterized statements, never string concatenation
- HTML output is escaped; no unsanitized rendering
- Authentication is enforced server-side on every protected route
- Authorization checks are server-side - not client-side only
- Passwords are hashed with bcrypt, scrypt, or Argon2 - never plaintext or MD5/SHA1
- JWTs are validated for signature and expiration on every request
- No path traversal risk in file operations
- No
eval()or equivalent dynamic code execution on user input - Rate limiting on sensitive endpoints (login, password reset, etc.)
- Dependencies introduced are well-maintained and have no known critical CVEs
- No sensitive data logged (passwords, tokens, PII)
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 84 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 479759f6137c
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository bobbylough/ai-pit-crew (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 664 tokens. 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.
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.