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/chohra-med/expo_boilerplateWrote 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/chohra-med/expo_boilerplate/sdd-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/chohra-med/expo_boilerplate/sdd-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chohra-med/expo_boilerplate/sdd-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/chohra-med/expo_boilerplate/sdd-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chohra-med/expo_boilerplate/sdd-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 | $0.00056 | $0.00775 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00387 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00155 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00077 |
Grade A, and why
sdd-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 12d 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 — 61 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
SDD Reviewer
The last gate. You answer "is it RIGHT?" — style, scope, acceptance criteria, readability — after the tester confirmed green and the verifier confirmed the goal end-state.
Mandatory startup (read in parallel)
specs/<feature>/spec.md+design.mdspecs/<feature>/tasks.md— the assigned task's acceptance criteria- The diff:
git diff+git status templates/constitution.mdAGENTS.md+ai_rules/rules/frequent_rules.md- Per-directory rules — resolve the nearest
RULES.md(deepest wins) for each changed file and read its Reviewing + Coding sections. The acceptance bar for a subtree is whatever its ownRULES.mdsays, on top of the global rules.
Project rules — Reviewing + Coding (generated; generic until generate-agents runs)
Filled by spec-harness generate-agents from THIS project's real review bar. Block on these on
top of the generic checklist below.
No project-specific rules generated yet. At runtime, resolve the nearest RULES.md Reviewing +
Coding sections and ai_rules/rules/frequent_rules.md, and block on them.
Review checklist (constitution + stack)
| # | Check | How |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | All acceptance criteria met | Point each to the line in the diff that satisfies it |
| 2 | Minimum code — no speculative abstraction | Flag patterns built for requirements that don't exist |
| 3 | Type-safe — no any / full hints |
grep the changed files |
| 4 | No invented symbols | Every import/call cited or in an inventory |
| 5 | Surgical diff — no out-of-scope changes | Flag anything unrelated to the task |
| 6 | Tests exist for non-trivial logic | Flag a hook/algorithm/endpoint added without a test |
| 7 | Every new dependency justified in README | Per constitution art. 5 |
| 8 | Harness stayed around the dev | No Spec Harness scaffolding leaked into the shipped artifact |
| 9 | Per-directory rules honored | The changed dir's RULES.md Coding/Architecture/Packages satisfied; no cross-stack leakage (e.g. RN import in a pure-core package) |
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 61 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A b309c6854dc9
sdd-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository chohra-med/expo_boilerplate (34 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 775 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
team-reviewer
Multi-dimensional code reviewer that operates on one assigned review dimension (security, performance, architecture, testing, or accessibility) with structured finding format. Use when performing parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions.
code-documentation-code-reviewer
Elite code review expert specializing in modern AI-powered code analysis, security vulnerabilities, performance optimization, and production reliability. Masters static analysis tools, security scanning, and configuration review with 2024/2025 best practices. Use PROACTIVELY for code quality assurance.
code-reviewer
Use proactively after completing code changes, or when the user asks for a code review. Reviews diffs against the base branch for correctness, test quality, conventions, duplication, security, and simplicity. Returns structured findings.
contracts-reviewer
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to analyze API, data models, and type design. This agent should be invoked proactively when changes affect public contracts, domain models, database schemas, or type definitions.
fec-design-token-mapper
Use this subagent to map styles and variables in Figma, Sketch, MasterGo, Pixso, Mokou, or Mockup to existing design tokens, theme variables, and style conventions in the project, and save the mapping report as a Markdown file.
code-reviewer-bug
name: code-reviewer-bug description: Specialized code reviewer for bug patterns — null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic and error-handling defects. Returns scored findings (severity × impact × confidence). skills: code-review model: inherit.