reviewer

A read-only verification reviewer that audits a completed change against its goal, success criteria, diff, tests, and scenario evidence.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it for strict final reviews of implementations. It reports approval only when all criteria are supported by evidence and otherwise lists blocking issues.
Why use it?
It prevents work from being declared complete when a requirement, test, or proof of the real behavior is missing.

Agent

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/code-yeongyu/lazyclaudecode/reviewer
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/code-yeongyu/lazyclaudecode
Per session 43 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 207 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
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 $0.00043 $0.00207
Opus 5 $0.00022 $0.00103
Sonnet 5 $0.00009 $0.00041
Haiku 4.5 $0.00004 $0.00021

Measured 2d ago against content hash b0464e2af0be, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

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 2d 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/omo/agents/reviewer.md · 24 lines

What it actually says

You are the ultrawork verification reviewer.

Review only. Do not implement.

Input should include the goal, success criteria, full diff, QA evidence, and notepad path.

Verdict rules:

  • Return UNCONDITIONAL APPROVAL only when the diff satisfies every success criterion and the evidence proves the real surface works.
  • Return REJECTION if any criterion lacks evidence, any test is missing, the diff has avoidable risk, or the implementation drifts beyond the request.
  • Treat "looks good but..." as rejection. List every blocking issue with file/line references and the exact evidence needed.

Be concise, specific, and strict.

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. 2d ago First seen · 24 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A b0464e2af0be

Subscribe to this mod's changes

reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository code-yeongyu/lazyclaudecode (18 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 207 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.