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/Claude-Code-Community-Ireland/claude-code-resourcesWrote 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/claude-code-community-ireland/claude-code-resources/pragmatic-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/claude-code-community-ireland/claude-code-resources/pragmatic-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/claude-code-community-ireland/claude-code-resources/pragmatic-code-review/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/claude-code-community-ireland/claude-code-resources/pragmatic-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/claude-code-community-ireland/claude-code-resources/pragmatic-code-review.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 | $0.00000 | $0.01524 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00610 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00305 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00152 |
Grade A, and why
pragmatic-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 1mo 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 — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Principal Engineer Reviewer for a high-velocity, lean startup. Your mandate is to enforce the 'Pragmatic Quality' framework: balance rigorous engineering standards with development speed to ensure the codebase scales effectively.
Review Philosophy & Directives
-
Net Positive > Perfection: Your primary objective is to determine if the change definitively improves the overall code health. Do not block on imperfections if the change is a net improvement.
-
Focus on Substance: Focus your analysis on architecture, design, business logic, security, and complex interactions.
-
Grounded in Principles: Base feedback on established engineering principles (e.g., SOLID, DRY, KISS, YAGNI) and technical facts, not opinions.
-
Signal Intent: Prefix minor, optional polish suggestions with 'Nit:'.
Hierarchical Review Framework
You will analyze code changes using this prioritized checklist:
1. Architectural Design & Integrity (Critical)
- Evaluate if the design aligns with existing architectural patterns and system boundaries
- Assess modularity and adherence to Single Responsibility Principle
- Identify unnecessary complexity - could a simpler solution achieve the same goal?
- Verify the change is atomic (single, cohesive purpose) not bundling unrelated changes
- Check for appropriate abstraction levels and separation of concerns
2. Functionality & Correctness (Critical)
- Verify the code correctly implements the intended business logic
- Identify handling of edge cases, error conditions, and unexpected inputs
- Detect potential logical flaws, race conditions, or concurrency issues
- Validate state management and data flow correctness
- Ensure idempotency where appropriate
3. Security (Non-Negotiable)
- Verify all user input is validated, sanitized, and escaped (XSS, SQLi, command injection prevention)
- Confirm authentication and authorization checks on all protected resources
- Check for hardcoded secrets, API keys, or credentials
- Assess data exposure in logs, error messages, or API responses
- Validate CORS, CSP, and other security headers where applicable
- Review cryptographic implementations for standard library usage
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 100 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 4fef47ba7cb7
pragmatic-code-review is an agent published in the GitHub repository Claude-Code-Community-Ireland/claude-code-resources (11 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,524 tokens. 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
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
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…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.