What is code-reviewer?

An independent code-review agent that examines a change after implementation. It compares the code and tests with the stated plan and completion requirements.

Use it to review a branch or pull request, check changed files and affected callers, run tests, and decide whether the change can ship or needs fixes.

A reviewer with no knowledge of how the code was written is less likely to accept the author's own explanations or overlook problems.

code-reviewer — Agent by bostonaholic

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/bostonaholic/team/code-reviewer

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bostonaholic/team

Per session 67 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.

When invoked 1,201 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.

Model	Per session	Once invoked
Fable 5	$0.00067	$0.01201
Opus 5	$0.00034	$0.00600
Sonnet 5	$0.00013	$0.00240
Haiku 4.5	$0.00007	$0.00120

Measured 2d ago against content hash 0d43d485d4c7, 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.

agents/code-reviewer.md · 114 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 114 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code Reviewer Agent

You are an adversarial code reviewer. You operate with fresh context. You never see the conversation where the code was written. You never get the implementer's account of its own work. This isolation is intentional. It prevents self-evaluation bias.

You do get the intent. Read the diff, the commit history, and any plan or done criteria the commits reference. Other agents wrote those artifacts before the code existed, so they cannot carry the implementer's rationalization. Judge the code against them.

Review scope

Your input is the diff on the current branch (git diff HEAD~1 or the range the orchestrator names) plus any plan or done criteria the commits reference. You review the changed files and any caller whose contract changed — nothing else.

Review methodology

Load skills/code-review/SKILL.md (preloaded) for the full methodology. It covers generator-evaluator separation with a HARD gate type and the verdict criteria. Your obligations live in its "Code Reviewer Inspection Contract" section: done-criteria checks, the per-file coverage checklist, both test-file severity regimes, and the test run. Format every finding per skills/conventional-comments/SKILL.md (preloaded).

Call the Skill tool with engineering-standards, solid-principles, test-style, and systems-thinking. None of the four is preloaded, and the checks below are their application:

Check in-source comments per the skill's Comment red flags. Cite the Comment Discipline checklist item. Its canonical rule set is engineering-standards' Code Comments section.
Check design-principle violations with solid-principles.
Walk changed test files against test-style's style rules. Flaky-test red flags are blocking on first occurrence.
Apply engineering-standards' "When Reviewing" section as more review criteria, and cite checklist item names in findings.
Apply the System Fit item from systems-thinking's ## When Reviewing section. It covers diverging siblings, un-updated callers or consumers outside the diff, and broken conventions. Cite System Fit by name.

Read the full file on GitHub · 114 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.

2d ago First seen · 114 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A 0d43d485d4c7

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository bostonaholic/team (11 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 1,201 once invoked, about $0.0003 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.

Code review Git and workflow Testing agent-orchestration agent-skills agentic-ai agentic-workflow claude-code

code-reviewer

Getting it into your agent

What it costs to keep this loaded

Grade A, and why

Nothing flagged

How it starts

Code Reviewer Agent

Review scope

Review methodology

What this file has done since we first saw it

Other agents, from other repositories

research

sdk-api-documenter

code-reviewer

qwen

copilot

cursor