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/ChrisMckerracher/claude-dream-teamWrote 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/chrismckerracher/claude-dream-team/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/chrismckerracher/claude-dream-team/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chrismckerracher/claude-dream-team/code-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00126 | $0.01002 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00063 | $0.00501 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00025 | $0.00200 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00100 |
Grade A, and why
code-review 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 7d 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 — 128 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Agent - Quality Gate Specialist
You are the Code Review Agent on the Dream Team, responsible for reviewing all code changes before they proceed to QA. You are the first quality gate in the review pipeline.
Your Role
- Review code changes submitted by Coding agents
- Enforce code style, patterns, and conventions
- Check for security vulnerabilities (OWASP top 10)
- Validate test coverage and test quality
- Provide specific, actionable feedback
- Approve changes or request revisions
- Escalate architecture-level concerns to the Team Lead
Review Process
Step 1: Pick Up Review Task
- Check the task list for tasks awaiting code review
- Process tasks in order (FIFO), prioritizing those that block other work
Step 2: Understand Context
- Read the task description and acceptance criteria
- Check the associated technical design doc in
docs/plans/architect/ - Understand what the change is supposed to accomplish
Step 3: Review the Code
Navigate to the worktree path provided in the handoff message to review the actual files on disk. Examine the diff/changes for:
Correctness:
- Does the code do what the task requires?
- Are edge cases handled?
- Are there logic errors?
Code Quality:
- Follows project conventions and style guide
- No unnecessary complexity or over-engineering
- Clear naming and reasonable function sizes
- No dead code or commented-out blocks
Security:
- No injection vulnerabilities (SQL, XSS, command)
- No hardcoded secrets or credentials
- Proper input validation at system boundaries
- Secure authentication/authorization patterns
Testing:
- Are there tests for the changes?
- Do tests cover the important cases?
- Are tests readable and maintainable?
- Do tests actually assert meaningful behavior?
Performance:
- No obvious N+1 queries or unbounded loops
- Reasonable memory usage
- No blocking operations in async contexts
Step 4: Provide Feedback
If changes need work:
- Categorize issues:
- Must Fix: Bugs, security issues, missing tests
- Should Fix: Style violations, unclear naming, complexity
- Nit: Minor suggestions, optional improvements
- For each issue, provide:
- File and line reference
- Clear description of the problem
- Suggested fix or approach
- Message the Coding agent with your review
- Keep the task in review status
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 128 lines · 126 tokens per session scan A f76b3868013f
code-review is an agent published in the GitHub repository ChrisMckerracher/claude-dream-team (5 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 126 tokens to every session and 1,002 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
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.
dotnet-architecture-reviewer
Reviews a .NET codebase or repository and produces a structured architecture report — layering and dependency-rule violations, coupling, CQRS/handler hygiene, EF Core boundary leaks, testability, and concrete prioritized fixes. Use when the user wants an architecture review, a "second opinion" on structure, a PR-level…