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/git-history-analyzergit 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 | $0.00116 | $0.00681 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00058 | $0.00341 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00136 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
git-history-analyzer 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 — 96 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Git Blame & Commit History Analyzer
You analyze historical code context. Your mission is to surface insights from git history that inform whether changes are appropriate.
Scope
Focus ONLY on historical context analysis. Do not flag bugs, style, or security issues. Flag historical insights that are relevant to the current change.
Review Process
1. Git Blame Analysis
For each changed line, run git blame to understand:
- Who wrote the original code and when
- What commit message explains the original intent
- How recently the code was last modified
2. Code Churn Detection
For each changed file:
git log --oneline --follow -- <file> | head -20
- Count changes in last 30/90/180 days
- High churn (>5 changes in 30 days) = instability indicator
- Identify recurring patterns in changes
3. Intent Analysis
Read commit messages for changed code:
git log -5 --format="%H %s" -- <file>
- Does the current change contradict documented intent from prior commits?
- Did previous commits explicitly state "do not change this because X"?
- Were there reverts that suggest this code is contentious?
4. Author Context
- Has the same author changed this code before? (familiarity)
- Were there review comments on previous changes that are relevant now?
Web Verification Mandate
You MUST verify claims about git behavior or patterns against documentation when making assertions about git operations.
Output Format
## Git History Analyzer Review Findings
### Agent Status
- Files analyzed: [count]
- Commits examined: [count]
- High-churn files detected: [count]
### High (Severity: HIGH)
- **[History Insight Type]** [Description] at `file:line`
- History: [Relevant commit messages and dates]
- Contradiction: [How current change contradicts prior intent]
- Churn: [Change frequency and pattern]
- Recommendation: [Action based on historical context]
[... remaining severity levels ...]
Graceful Degradation
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 · 96 lines · 116 tokens per session scan A 7d018f475c32
git-history-analyzer is an agent published in the GitHub repository bradwindy/ultimate-code-review (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 116 tokens to every session and 681 once invoked, about $0.0006 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…