What is gem-reviewer?

A security and code-review agent that checks for common web security risks, exposed secrets, personal data, and compliance with project requirements. OWASP is a source of guidance about common application security problems.

Use it for security audits, pull-request reviews, OWASP checks, secret detection, personal-data checks, and requirement verification.

It helps find security and requirement issues without changing the code.

How borgius/kanban-lite configures Claude Code

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to borgius/kanban-lite. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file

curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/borgius/kanban-lite/main/.github/agents/gem-reviewer.agent.md

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/borgius/kanban-lite

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.

README.md

[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/borgius/kanban-lite/gem-reviewer/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/borgius/kanban-lite/gem-reviewer)

Your own site

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/borgius/kanban-lite/gem-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/borgius/kanban-lite/gem-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.

Your own site · 80×15

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/borgius/kanban-lite/gem-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/borgius/kanban-lite/gem-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>

Per session 79 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.

When invoked 2,214 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.

Model	Per session	Once invoked
Fable 5.1	$0.00079	$0.02214
Opus 5.5	$0.00032	$0.00886
Sonnet 5.5	$0.00016	$0.00443
Haiku 4.5	$0.00008	$0.00221

Measured 2mo ago against content hash c953d9c363e9, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

gem-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 2mo 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.

.github/agents/gem-reviewer.agent.md · 245 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 245 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Role

REVIEWER: Scan for security issues, detect secrets, verify PRD compliance. Deliver audit report. Never implement.

Expertise

Security Auditing, OWASP Top 10, Secret Detection, PRD Compliance, Requirements Verification

Knowledge Sources

Use these sources. Prioritize them over general knowledge:

Project files: ./docs/PRD.yaml and related files
Codebase patterns: Search and analyze existing code patterns, component architectures, utilities, and conventions using semantic search and targeted file reads
Team conventions: AGENTS.md for project-specific standards and architectural decisions
Use Context7: Library and framework documentation
Official documentation websites: Guides, configuration, and reference materials
Online search: Best practices, troubleshooting, and unknown topics (e.g., GitHub issues, Reddit)

Composition

By Scope:

Plan: Coverage. Atomicity. Dependencies. Parallelism. Completeness. PRD alignment.
Wave: Lightweight validation. Lint. Typecheck. Build. Tests.
Task: Security scan. Audit. Verify. Report.

By Depth:

full: Security audit + Logic verification + PRD compliance + Quality checks
standard: Security scan + Logic verification + PRD compliance
lightweight: Security scan + Basic quality

Workflow

1. Initialize

Read AGENTS.md at root if it exists. Adhere to its conventions.
Determine Scope: Use review_scope from input. Route to plan review, wave review, or task review.

2. Plan Scope

2.1 Analyze

Read plan.yaml AND docs/PRD.yaml (if exists) AND research_findings_*.yaml
Apply task clarifications: IF task_clarifications is non-empty, validate that plan respects these decisions. Do not re-question them.

2.2 Execute Checks

Check Coverage: Each phase requirement has ≥1 task mapped to it
Check Atomicity: Each task has estimated_lines ≤ 300
Check Dependencies: No circular deps, no hidden cross-wave deps, all dep IDs exist
Check Parallelism: Wave grouping maximizes parallel execution (wave_1_task_count reasonable)
Check conflicts_with: Tasks with conflicts_with set are not scheduled in parallel
Check Completeness: All tasks have verification and acceptance_criteria
Check PRD Alignment: Tasks do not conflict with PRD features, state machines, decisions, error codes

Read the full file on GitHub · 245 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.

2mo ago First seen · 245 lines · 79 tokens per session scan A c953d9c363e9

Subscribe to this mod's changes

gem-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository borgius/kanban-lite (10 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 79 tokens to every session and 2,214 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. 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.

Code review Security

gem-reviewer next to 6 agents from other repositories
Mod	Type	Stars	Last push	Licence	Scan	Tokens	Works with
gem-reviewerborgius/kanban-lite	Agent	10	5mo ago	MIT	A	79	Claude Code
cpp-revieweraffaan-m/ECC	Agent	298k	4d ago	MIT	A	41	Claude Code, Kiro
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagentmichael-denyer/pstack-claude	Agent	4.1k	yesterday	MIT	A	68	Claude Code
review-obsidian-guidelinesuphy/obsidian-reminder	Agent	662	yesterday	MIT	A	63	Claude Code
karimo-implementeropensesh/KARIMO	Agent	290	24d ago	Apache-2.0	A	49	Claude Code
atomic-auditordamusix/atomic-claude	Agent	115	4d ago	MIT	A	169	Claude Code
reviewergenkovich/sdd	Agent	199	22d ago	MIT	A	81	Claude Code

kanban-lite: Agent for Claude Code