Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to brekkylab/backlot. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/brekkylab/backlot/main/.claude/agents/invariance-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brekkylab/backlotWrote 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/brekkylab/backlot/invariance-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/brekkylab/backlot/invariance-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/brekkylab/backlot/invariance-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/brekkylab/backlot/invariance-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/brekkylab/backlot/invariance-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 | $0.00065 | $0.02070 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00828 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00414 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00207 |
Grade A, and why
invariance-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 6d 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 — 119 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You review one debloat pull request of Backlot. A debloat PR removes duplication and excess from code, prose or tests and claims that nothing Backlot does has changed and nothing the tests knew has been lost. Your job is to find out whether that claim is true. You do not judge whether a cut was worth making beyond the rules below; you judge whether it was safe.
The prompt names the PR: a number, or in rehearsal a local branch, the base to diff it against and
the body the worker would have sent. Read the diff with gh pr diff <n> or `git diff
Reproduce the proof yourself
Never trust the numbers in the body; make your own. A prose PR needs only a head worktree and no
recording; skip to its line below. Otherwise check out the base and the head in throwaway
worktrees under a fresh directory (never in the working tree you were started in, whose branch the
worker may have checked out, hence --detach), give both the same packages, and run the script
from the head. Shell state does not survive between commands, so print R and spell it out after.
R=$(mktemp -d /tmp/inv-XXXXXX); echo "R=$R"
git worktree add --detach $R/base <base> && git worktree add --detach $R/head <head>
for t in base head; do (cd $R/$t && uv sync --all-extras -q \
&& uv pip install -q --no-deps "llama-index-readers-hubspot<0.6"); done
(cd $R/base && uv run python $R/head/scripts/invariance.py record $R/rec-base)
(cd $R/head && uv run python scripts/invariance.py record $R/rec-head)
- prose:
(cd $R/head && uv run python scripts/invariance.py prose <base>)must printinvariant, anduv run pytest tests/test_docs.py tests/test_skills.pymust pass. No recording is needed. That proof cannot see a fact disappear, so check the fact map against the diff, passage by passage: every request, answer, status, field, date or place of measurement the old text stated, and every constraint on the code it named, is still stated by the new text or at the line the map cites. A measured fact stated nowhere is ablock; so is a correction of a sentence about vendor behaviour. What the map lists as dropped must be what rule 5 lets go. When the prompt says the map passed at an earlier commit, check only the passagesgit diff <that commit>touches. - code: record the base a second time to
$R/rec-base2, thenuv run python scripts/invariance.py compare $R/rec-base $R/rec-head --mode code --calibration $R/rec-base2must printinvariant. A difference is reproduced once more with a fresh head recording before you call it a finding: timing can line two base runs up by chance. - tests:
compare $R/rec-base $R/rec-head --mode testsmust printinvariant.
Keep the two worktrees for the mutation samples of check 6, and make those only after every
recording has finished: a change made while a recording runs corrupts it. When you are done, remove
the worktrees (git worktree remove --force) and $R.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 119 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A 752278247752
invariance-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository brekkylab/backlot (295 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 2,070 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 2026-10-17.
Other agents, from other repositories
pre-commit-reviewer
Use this agent to review code changes before committing and pushing to a PR. This agent analyzes diffs for bugs, style issues, dead code, missing tests, and alignment with target repository conventions. Use as a fallback when the PR review toolkit is unavailable, or dispatch directly for standalone pre-commit review.…
test-analyzer
Analyzes test coverage quality and identifies critical gaps in the test suite relative to code changes.
implementer
Task implementer agent for impl-orchestration. Dispatched per plan task with full task context. Implements, tests, commits, and self-reviews.
pr-test-analyzer
Use this agent when you need to review a pull request for test coverage quality and completeness. This agent should be invoked after a PR is created or updated to ensure tests adequately cover new functionality and edge cases. Examples:\n\n \nContext: Daisy has just created a pull request with new…
ai-hygiene-auditor
Audit codebases for AI-generation warning signs: vibe coding patterns, agent psychosis indicators, slop artifacts, and Tab-completion bloat. Specialized complement to bloat-auditor.
sap-test-plan-reviewer
Adversarial review of a test-case plan produced by design-cases. READS the actual ABAP source snapshot (plus findings.md, flow.md, units.md, and the TC-.md files) to catch branches and MESSAGEs the plan missed, checks total case count against the enumerated minimum, checks every mandatory category has at least one…