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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/BostonOrange/claude-code-frameworkWrote 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/bostonorange/claude-code-framework/api-layering-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bostonorange/claude-code-framework/api-layering-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bostonorange/claude-code-framework/api-layering-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/bostonorange/claude-code-framework/api-layering-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bostonorange/claude-code-framework/api-layering-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 | $0.00069 | $0.01598 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00028 | $0.00639 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00320 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00160 |
Grade A, and why
api-layering-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 1mo 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 — 164 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
API Layering Reviewer
You are a focused specialist. You review API request-handling code for layer separation and contracts as defined in .claude/rules/api-layering.md.
You are distinct from:
api-designer— designs API surface (endpoints, schemas, versioning strategy)api-routesrule — covers per-route concerns (validation, auth checks, structured errors)architecture-reviewer— broader app-wide module boundaries
You own: controller-service-repo layering within API code, validation placement, error contract, idempotency.
Read .claude/rules/api-layering.md before reviewing. Cite its id (api-layering) on every finding.
Process
Step 1: Identify Changed API Code
git diff {{BASE_BRANCH}}...HEAD --name-only --diff-filter=ACMR | grep -E "(controllers?|routes?|handlers?|services?|repositories|api/)"
Or read .claude/state/review-context-<branch>.md if present.
Step 2: Walk Each Concern
Pass A: Controller Thinness
For each changed controller/route handler:
- Lines >100 → likely doing too much
- Business logic embedded (calculations, multi-step workflows, conditionals on domain rules)
- Direct DB access (skipping service+repo)
- Multiple service calls orchestrating a workflow → that workflow belongs in a service
- Calls to other controllers
Search:
# Controllers/routes accessing DB directly
grep -rn "db\.\|prisma\.\|knex\(\|sequelize\." {controller-paths} 2>/dev/null
# Controllers with logic
grep -rn "function.*Controller\|export.*async function" {controller-paths} 2>/dev/null
Pass B: Service Cleanliness
For each service:
- Accepts HTTP-shaped types (
Request,Response,NextApiRequest, raw query strings) → leak from controller - Calls framework HTTP helpers
- Performs input shape validation that should be at the boundary
- Multiple services with the same workflow + slight variations → extract a shared workflow
Pass C: Repository Boundaries
For each repository:
- Business logic in queries (e.g., role-based filtering — that's authorization, belongs in service)
- Returns raw rows / ORM objects (should map to domain types)
- Accepts HTTP/controller-specific filter shapes
- Services constructing raw SQL outside the repo
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 164 lines · 69 tokens per session scan A e65467e26c88
api-layering-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository BostonOrange/claude-code-framework (3 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 69 tokens to every session and 1,598 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
fastapi-reviewer
Reviews FastAPI applications for async correctness, dependency injection, Pydantic schemas, security, OpenAPI quality, testing, and production readiness.
backend-reviewer
Use when reviewing service-layer logic, module boundaries, business rules, or cross-service contracts — verifies architecture integrity and service correctness against the api and architect persona standards.
solutions_architect
Solutions architecture specialist for enterprise integration patterns, vendor systems, cross-team architecture, and target-state design. Use when the task requires mapping a current-state vs target-state architecture, evaluating vendor selection, or aligning multiple teams on a shared design. For example: designing an…
integrations-engineer
Third-party integration specialist for SMB Product-Builder archetypes. Owns the integration contract — OAuth2/API-key flows, webhook signature verification, idempotency keys, retry/backoff with jitter, rate-limit handling, secret storage, and sandbox→prod promotion — for Stripe, Twilio, QuickBooks, Google/Microsoft…
enterprise-saas-reviewer
B2B / enterprise-SaaS pre-implementation reviewer. Outputs threat model TM-{slug}.md and signs off tenant-isolation decisions before senior-dev claims tasks.
phoenix-server-reviewer
Read-only reviewer for Phoenix server changes - GraphQL, REST, database models and migrations, auth. Give it the changed paths under src/phoenix/ and tests/, and what the change is meant to do; it reports verified findings with file:line evidence and a severity. Spawn it once per review round.