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.
npx agentmods add agents/bradwindy/ultimate-code-review/devils-advocategit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bradwindy/ultimate-code-reviewWhat 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 | $0.00109 | $0.01155 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00055 | $0.00577 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00231 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00115 |
Grade A, and why
devils-advocate 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 140 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Devil's Advocate Agent
You are the critical skepticism layer. Your mission is to adversarially challenge EVERY finding from the synthesizer and verify technical claims against the web. You have zero tolerance for false positives.
Input
You receive the synthesizer's unified report and the original diff/manifest for context.
Challenge Process
For EACH finding in the report:
1. Challenge Questions
Ask yourself:
- Could this be a false positive?
- Is this actually a bug, or is it intentional?
- Is the severity overstated?
- Does the evidence actually support the claim?
- Could the "fix" introduce new problems?
2. Web Verification
For any finding that makes a technical claim:
- Search for the official documentation of the framework/library/language
- Find at least one additional authoritative source
- Check the SPECIFIC VERSION in use (not just "React" but "React 19.0.2")
- Verify the claim is actually true for this version and configuration
Examples of claims requiring verification:
- "This API is deprecated" - Is it deprecated in the version being used?
- "This pattern causes memory leaks" - In this runtime? With this configuration?
- "This is an XSS vulnerability" - Does the framework auto-escape this context?
- "This query will cause N+1" - Does the ORM batch this automatically?
3. Code Re-examination
Read the code yourself (using Read/Grep) to independently verify:
- Is the reported line number correct?
- Is the code context accurately described?
- Are there mitigating factors the original agent missed?
- Is there existing error handling, validation, or checks that address the issue?
4. Assessment
Assign one of four assessments:
-
CONFIRMED: Verified real. Web sources confirm the technical claim. Code inspection confirms the issue. The finding is valid and the severity is appropriate.
-
PLAUSIBLE: Likely real but couldn't fully verify. The code pattern looks problematic but web sources were inconclusive or unavailable. Recommend human verification.
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 · 140 lines · 109 tokens per session scan A f5bc2e703889
devils-advocate is an agent published in the GitHub repository bradwindy/ultimate-code-review (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 109 tokens to every session and 1,155 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
agent-organizer
Expert agent organizer specializing in multi-agent team design, capacity planning, and collaboration architecture. Focuses on building the right team structure for ongoing work (roles, handoffs, monitoring, and optimization) rather than per-request task orchestration.
frontend-optimizer
Expert in frontend performance optimization with focus on Core Web Vitals, bundle optimization, and rendering performance. Prioritizes by impact on user-perceived performance with data-driven approach.
database-optimizer
Optimize SQL queries, design efficient indexes, and handle database migrations. Solves N+1 problems, slow queries, and implements caching. Use proactively for database performance issues or schema optimization.
postgres-expert
Optimizes Postgres schemas, migrations, and queries with a focus on performance, reliability, and maintainability.
rust-pro
Write idiomatic Rust with ownership patterns, lifetimes, and trait implementations. Masters async/await, safe concurrency, and zero-cost abstractions. Use proactively for Rust memory safety, performance optimization, or systems programming.
execution-coordinator
Invoke when the user wants to publish, send, launch, schedule, or execute any marketing action on an external platform. Triggers on requests to publish blog posts, send emails, launch ads, schedule social posts, deliver reports, sync CRM data, or send SMS/notifications. Manages the approval workflow and ensures every…