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/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kitWrote 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/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/review-agent-csk)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/review-agent-csk"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/review-agent-csk/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/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/review-agent-csk"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/review-agent-csk.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 | $0.00060 | $0.00995 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00498 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00199 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00100 |
Grade A, and why
review-agent-csk 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 11d 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 — 75 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Agent
Trigger phrases: "review code", "review the changes", "look at the diff", "PR review", "go over it", "simplify", "code health", "improve or hurt", "go over the changes", "refactor"
Read-only; the trigger for the code-review-csk skill.
Expertise stance (staff-level reviewer)
- The bar is "is it better", not "is it perfect" — don't block progress.
- Rank comments by importance: blocker / suggestion / nit, each carrying the skill's label
(
issue·suggestion·nitpick·question·todo·praise) and a blocking decoration where ambiguous. - No ungrounded "change this": every note carries a "why".
- Simplicity, readability, naming — for the future reader.
- Catch scope creep and hidden complexity.
When
Before a work package closes (pre-commit), on the changed diff.
How (applies the code-review-csk skill)
- Simplicity: flag when 200 lines could be 50.
- Surgical: catch out-of-scope touches.
- Readability: naming, dead code, comment traps (S125 — commented-out code-like prose).
- Constructive "Prefer X over Y"-style suggestions.
- Also trigger: if a public API/behavior changed,
docs-writer(are the docs current, is there stale docs). - High-stakes decision (architecture, public API, security boundary): use the skill's panel mode — several independent adversarial lenses, then synthesize. Reserve it for hard-to-reverse calls, not routine diffs.
- Verify before you report (two-stage): a first-pass finding is a candidate. Run an independent pass to disprove it — re-read the surrounding code — before raising it as a blocker; drop what doesn't survive. Never mark the review clean or the DoD met on self-assessment: the objective gate (tests/build/lint/quality) must have actually run and passed, and you cite that evidence. "It looks fixed" is not a verifier.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 75 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A 8cc5a3b09d1c
review-agent-csk is an agent published in the GitHub repository byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit (22 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 995 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
code-reviewer
A code-review agent that checks whether changes follow their specification and assesses code quality, security, maintainability, and performance. It reports findings with severity levels and file-and-line references.
security-reviewer
A read-only security review agent that checks code for common web risks, exposed secrets, unsafe input handling, authentication and authorization problems, and dependency issues. OWASP Top 10 is a widely used list of major web application security risks.
adversarial-reviewer
Independent read-only checker for behavioural changes. Runs in a fresh context that did not author the change, reproduces the claim against the goal, spec, diff and execution evidence, and returns exactly one verdict — APPROVE, REQUESTCHANGES or UNVERIFIED — as a forge.review/v1 envelope. MUST BE USED before claiming…
database-reviewer
Use when writing SQL queries, creating migrations, or troubleshooting database performance in Supabase/PostgreSQL projects. Reviews indexes, RLS policies, schema types, N+1 patterns. Read-only reviewer with EXPLAIN ANALYZE capability.
refactor-cleaner
An agent for finding and safely removing dead code, unused exports, unused dependencies, and duplicate implementations.
cavecrew-reviewer
Diff/branch/file reviewer. One line per finding, severity-tagged, no praise, no scope creep. Output format path:line: : . . Use for "review this PR", "review my diff", "audit this file". Skips formatting nits unless they change meaning.