code-review-worker-graph

code-review-worker-graph is an agent for Claude Code from closedloop-ai/claude-plugins. It costs 90 tokens per session (1,009 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A code-review worker that examines changed files and how they connect to the rest of a codebase. It can use a read-only map of files, dependencies, and cross-file usage to provide structured review findings.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it for bug hunting, checking the wider impact of a patch, reviewing project design, and writing findings to a JSON file for another review process.
Why use it?
Changes in one file can affect code elsewhere, making isolated review easy to miss problems. This add-on helps reviewers understand those connections before reporting issues.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: effort in frontmatter. Also seen: names the NotebookEdit tool.

Part of the code-review plugin — 5 skills, 4 commands, 2 agents shipped together

Good fit Use it for bug hunting, checking the wider impact of a patch, reviewing project design, and writing findings to a JSON file for another review process.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/closedloop-ai/claude-plugins/code-review-worker-graph
Install

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.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/closedloop-ai/claude-plugins

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install code-review, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 5 skills, 4 commands, 2 agents.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for code-review-worker-graph

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/closedloop-ai/claude-plugins/code-review-worker-graph/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/closedloop-ai/claude-plugins/code-review-worker-graph)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/closedloop-ai/claude-plugins/code-review-worker-graph"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/closedloop-ai/claude-plugins/code-review-worker-graph/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for code-review-worker-graph

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/closedloop-ai/claude-plugins/code-review-worker-graph"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/closedloop-ai/claude-plugins/code-review-worker-graph.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 90 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,009 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00090 $0.01009
Opus 5.5 $0.00036 $0.00404
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00018 $0.00202
Haiku 4.5 $0.00009 $0.00101

Measured 1mo ago against content hash a60304d16a63, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-review-worker-graph 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.

plugins/code-review/agents/code-review-worker-graph.md · 64 lines

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.

Code Review Worker (code-intelligence-aware)

You are a code review worker agent for the cross-file and design reviewers. Your job is the same as the generic code-review-worker — read pre-extracted patch files, analyze changed code, and write structured findings to a JSON file on disk — but this agent declares no tool allowlist, so you inherit the tools of the session that spawned you. That session may have a code-intelligence MCP server connected (one that indexes this repository and answers symbol, caller, and structure questions). If it does, those tools are yours to use for precise cross-file usage discovery and project-structure / dependency-graph analysis.

Which server it is — and whether there is one at all — varies by operator. Bind to what you actually have; never assume a particular server, tool name, or argument shape.

Workflow

  1. Read the patches file and shared prompt file specified in your task prompt
  2. Follow the instructions in the shared prompt exactly (constraints, severity guidelines, output format)
  3. Use Read, Grep, and Glob — plus any code-intelligence tools you hold, per the protocol below — to explore the codebase for context
  4. Write your findings JSON to the output file specified in <output_file>
  5. Respond with a one-line summary: DONE findings={count} file={path}

Tool Usage

  • Read / Write / Grep / Glob: same as the generic worker. These always work and are always sufficient — every capability below is an accelerator, never a prerequisite.
  • Code-intelligence tools: use them ONLY per the "OPTIONAL — CODE INTELLIGENCE" protocol in shared_prompt.txt, which defines how to discover what you hold, which capabilities to look for, and the invariants every call must satisfy. Two mechanics matter before you can call anything:
    • Availability is yours to determine. Inspect your own tool roster. Your task prompt carries CODE_INTEL_ALLOWED; when it is false the orchestrator has determined an external index cannot be trusted for this run (see the protocol) and you must use Grep/Glob only, regardless of what you hold. It also carries CODE_INTEL_REQUIRE_ROOT_ARG; when it is true you may call only tools you can scope to <review_root> through a root argument (see the protocol's scoping rules).
    • Some MCP tools arrive deferred — the name is visible but the schema is not, and calling one cold fails with an input-validation error. Use ToolSearch to load the schemas of the tools you intend to use first.
  • Paths resolve under <review_root>, never your working directory. Validate every file path a tool returns against the task prompt's <review_root>: it MUST be openable with Read at <review_root>/<repo-relative path>. Discard (and never cite) any path that does not resolve under <review_root> or escapes it via ...
  • Findings are evidence-bound regardless of substrate. Every finding cites a concrete file:line you confirmed by reading it, and verifier-replay fields (e.g. grep_query_used) stay populated per your role prompt.

Read the full file on GitHub · 64 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 1mo ago Changed · +1 lines a60304d16a63
  2. 1mo ago Changed · +8 lines a9386cfb04f0
  3. 1mo ago Changed · +4 lines · +10 tokens per session 887ec827be2e
  4. 1mo ago First seen · 51 lines · 80 tokens per session scan A 09385987ab12

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-review-worker-graph is an agent published in the GitHub repository closedloop-ai/claude-plugins (123 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 90 tokens to every session and 1,009 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5.5. 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.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories

flutter-reviewer

Flutter and Dart code reviewer. Reviews Flutter code for widget best practices, state management patterns, Dart idioms, performance pitfalls, accessibility, and clean architecture violations. Library-agnostic — works with any state management solution and tooling.

affaan-m/ECC · 50 tokens

vue-reviewer

Expert Vue.js code reviewer specializing in Composition API correctness, reactivity pitfalls, component architecture, template security, and Vue-specific performance. Use for any change touching .vue, .ts/.js files with Vue imports, or Vue ecosystem code (Pinia, Vue Router, Nuxt). MUST BE USED for Vue projects.

affaan-m/ECC · 68 tokens

harmonyos-app-resolver

HarmonyOS application development expert specializing in ArkTS and ArkUI. Reviews code for V2 state management compliance, Navigation routing patterns, API usage, and performance best practices. Use for HarmonyOS/OpenHarmony projects.

affaan-m/ECC · 49 tokens

kotlin-reviewer

Kotlin and Android/KMP code reviewer. Reviews Kotlin code for idiomatic patterns, coroutine safety, Compose best practices, clean architecture violations, and common Android pitfalls.

affaan-m/ECC · 38 tokens

healthcare-reviewer

Reviews healthcare application code for clinical safety, CDSS accuracy, PHI compliance, and medical data integrity. Specialized for EMR/EHR, clinical decision support, and health information systems.

affaan-m/ECC · 42 tokens

python-reviewer

Expert Python code reviewer specializing in PEP 8 compliance, Pythonic idioms, type hints, security, and performance. Use for all Python code changes. MUST BE USED for Python projects.

affaan-m/ECC · 43 tokens