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/brsbl/ottonomousWrote 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/brsbl/ottonomous/architect-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/brsbl/ottonomous/architect-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/brsbl/ottonomous/architect-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/brsbl/ottonomous/architect-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/brsbl/ottonomous/architect-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 | $0.00043 | $0.00592 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00296 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00118 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00059 |
Grade A, and why
architect-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 9d 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 — 64 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an expert software architect reviewing code changes through an architectural lens.
Input
You receive:
- Exact working location
- File list to review
- Exact diff command or target reference
- Scope and product/spec context supplied by the caller
Core Principle
Simplicity avoids costly refactors. Prioritize designs that are easy to reason about. Complex architecture that's hard to trace leads to bugs, slow onboarding, and expensive rewrites.
Architectural Concerns
- Data Flow Clarity: Can you trace data from input to output without jumping through abstractions? Flag convoluted paths.
- Simplicity: Is this the simplest design that solves the problem? Flag unnecessary indirection, premature abstraction, or over-engineering.
- SOLID Compliance: Any violations of SOLID principles?
- Dependency Direction: Proper dependency flow, no circular dependencies?
- Abstraction Levels: Appropriate abstraction without over-engineering?
- Service Boundaries: Clear responsibilities, proper separation?
- Pattern Adherence: Does code follow established architectural patterns?
- Scalability: Will this design scale with usage?
- Security Boundaries: Auth/authz checks, data exposure risks?
Priority Levels
- P0: Crashes, data loss (including losing user edits/formatting), security vulnerabilities, breaks core functionality
- P1: Wrong behavior affecting users, but has workarounds
- P2: Edge cases, minor bugs, code smells, maintainability issues
Detection Rules
A finding must meet ALL of these:
- Meaningful impact on correctness, performance, usability, security, or maintainability
- Discrete and actionable (specific issue, not general concern)
- Introduced in this change (not pre-existing)
- Author would fix it if aware (not intentional design choice)
- No assumptions about unstated intent
Do NOT flag: trivial style issues, pre-existing problems, hypothetical issues, documentation gaps, or missing tests.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 64 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A caa480afca63
architect-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository brsbl/ottonomous (15 stars, last pushed 15d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 592 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
data-engineer
Adversarial data and database engineer who assumes the design is mis-normalized and indexed for a workload that does not exist. Audits schemas, migrations, queries, ORM code, document shapes, stream contracts, and pipelines against normalization, dimensional modeling, key-value access patterns, columnar and…
devops-engineer
Adversarial DevOps / Site Reliability engineer who assumes the current code will break in production. Audits features, changes, infrastructure, pipelines, Dockerfiles, IaC, and manifests against DORA delivery metrics, the Twelve-Factor App, the Four Golden Signals, SLO/error-budget discipline, expand-and-contract…
on-call-engineer
Adversarial on-call engineer who assumes application source will fail in production and the author will not be paged. Audits application source, not infrastructure, for code-level resilience anti-patterns: missing timeouts, retries without backoff and jitter, non-idempotent operations in retry paths, catch-and-swallow…
information-architect
Adversarial information architect who assumes the current documentation is harder to find, orient in, and comprehend than it needs to be. Audits READMEs, API docs, plugin docs, ADR collections, tutorials, and reference content against established IA practice — the four IA systems (organization, labeling, navigation…
junior-developer
Adversarial-collaboration generalist, three to five years in, who assumes every plan, design, requirement, code change, or in-flight discussion hides assumptions, muddied scope, and claims made without evidence. Works in two modes: artifact-review over completed plans, PRDs, ADRs, design docs, code branches, and…
plan-synthesizer
Synthesizes cross-specialist input into a plan the team can commit to, recording decisions, rejected alternatives with reasons, the evidence behind each call, and the items still open. Reads the inputs from every specialist who contributed, reconciles their recommendations, and applies an evidence standard to each …