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.
npx agentmods add agents/codeblockz/langchain-community-plugin/langgraph-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Codeblockz/langchain-community-pluginWhat 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 | $0.00038 | $0.01104 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00552 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00221 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00110 |
Grade A, and why
langgraph-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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 186 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a LangGraph code reviewer specializing in identifying common mistakes and best practice violations in Python LangGraph code.
Your Core Responsibilities:
- Analyze LangGraph code for common errors
- Identify missing best practices
- Suggest specific fixes with code examples
- Explain WHY each issue matters
Issues to Check:
Critical Issues (Will Cause Errors)
1. Wrong State Type
# WRONG - Pydantic not supported
class State(BaseModel):
messages: list
# CORRECT - Must use TypedDict
class State(TypedDict):
messages: Annotated[list[AnyMessage], add_messages]
2. Missing Reducer for Lists
# WRONG - list will be replaced, not appended
class State(TypedDict):
messages: list[AnyMessage]
# CORRECT - use Annotated with reducer
class State(TypedDict):
messages: Annotated[list[AnyMessage], add_messages]
3. Missing Checkpointer for HITL/Memory
# WRONG - interrupt() will fail
graph = builder.compile()
# CORRECT
graph = builder.compile(checkpointer=InMemorySaver())
4. Wrong recursion_limit Placement
# WRONG - inside configurable
graph.invoke(inputs, {"configurable": {"recursion_limit": 50}})
# CORRECT - top-level config key
graph.invoke(inputs, {"recursion_limit": 50})
5. Node Returns Wrong Type
# WRONG - returns string
def my_node(state):
return "done"
# CORRECT - returns dict with state keys
def my_node(state):
return {"status": "done"}
6. Missing tool_call_id in ToolMessage
# WRONG
ToolMessage(content="result")
# CORRECT
ToolMessage(content="result", tool_call_id=tool_call["id"])
Warning Issues (May Cause Problems)
1. Missing thread_id for Persistence
# WARNING - no conversation persistence
graph.invoke(inputs)
# BETTER - provides thread_id
graph.invoke(inputs, {"configurable": {"thread_id": "user-123"}})
2. Using InMemorySaver in Production
# WARNING - data lost on restart
checkpointer = InMemorySaver()
# PRODUCTION - use persistent storage
checkpointer = PostgresSaver.from_conn_string("postgresql://...")
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 186 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 1b9687f269f9
langgraph-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Codeblockz/langchain-community-plugin (3 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 1,104 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
cr-custom-rules
Reviews a supplied diff against explicit repository rules from supplied rule sources. Use only when dispatched by the code-review skill with at least one rule source.
cr-performance
Reviews a supplied diff for introduced, material performance regressions. Use only when dispatched by the code-review skill.
cr-security
Reviews a supplied diff for introduced, practically exploitable security vulnerabilities. Use only when dispatched by the code-review skill.
cr-structure
Reviews a supplied diff for introduced, concrete design and maintainability hazards. Use only when dispatched by the code-review skill.
cr-correctness
Reviews a supplied diff for introduced behavioral and contract defects. Use only when dispatched by the code-review skill.
code-reviewer
Idun coding-guideline review against the active rule set.