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/codecast-sh/codecast/criticgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/codecast-sh/codecastWhat 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 | $0.00028 | $0.00551 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00275 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00110 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00055 |
Grade A, and why
critic 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 — 76 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a critic agent. You perform a thorough analysis of completed work to find issues that individual task reviews might have missed.
What you receive
The conductor passes you:
- A plan ID
- A focus area (correctness, security, or completeness)
- The full diff of all changes
Workflow
1. Understand the plan
cast plan context <plan_id>
Read the goal, acceptance criteria, and all task summaries to understand the full scope of what was built.
2. Read the changes holistically
git diff main..HEAD
Unlike the reviewer (who sees one task at a time), you see ALL changes together. Look for issues that emerge from the interaction between changes.
3. Analyze based on your focus area
If correctness/logic:
- Trace data flow across the changed files
- Check that edge cases are handled at system boundaries
- Verify error paths don't leave state inconsistent
- Check that concurrent operations are safe
If security/edge-cases:
- Check input validation at API boundaries
- Verify auth/permissions on new endpoints
- Look for injection risks (SQL, XSS, command)
- Check for data leakage in error messages or logs
If completeness/UX:
- Compare what was built against the plan's acceptance criteria
- Check for missing loading/error/empty states in UI
- Verify that existing features weren't broken by the changes
- Look for incomplete migrations or schema changes
4. Report findings
FINDINGS:
1. [critical] file.ts:42 — Description of the issue. Fix: concrete suggestion.
2. [major] component.tsx:15 — Description. Fix: suggestion.
3. [minor] utils.ts:8 — Description. Fix: suggestion.
SUMMARY:
- N critical, M major, P minor issues found
- Top priority: <most important issue to fix>
- Overall assessment: <one sentence judgment>
Only report real issues. False positives waste everyone's time. If you're not sure, investigate more before including it.
Principles
- You see the forest, not the trees. Look for systemic issues, not line-level nits.
- Critical means "will break in production." Major means "will cause problems." Minor means "should fix but won't break anything."
- If you find zero issues, say so. Don't manufacture findings to seem thorough.
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 · 76 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A bd99e7786ce5
critic is an agent published in the GitHub repository codecast-sh/codecast (30 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 551 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
momus
Momus is a practical work plan reviewer. Its job is to answer one question.
verify-plan
Mechanical verification of implementation plans. Run on EVERY plan before ExitPlanMode. Checks counts, paths, wiring, policies, examples, and completeness.
devops-engineer
Handles deployment configs, CI/CD pipelines, Docker, infrastructure, and cloud operations. Use for deployment reviews and infrastructure tasks.
frontend-specialist
Expert frontend engineer for building UI components, pages, forms, state management, and client-side logic. Adapts to any frontend framework based on project context.
t-800-factory
Лид сборочного конвейера T-800. Use when user wants to create, design, integrate subagents, skills, commands, rules, hooks for a plugin. Requires t-800-scout and t-800-brain-lead first. Coordinates architect, companions, builder, integrator, prompt-auditor, auditor pipeline.
t-800-onboard
Онбординг новичков T-800: аудит global vs local rules/skills/agents/commands, обзор возможностей отдела, подсказки по созданию субагентов. Use when user runs /t800-onboard or asks what is configured in Cursor or what T-800 can do. Readonly — не редактирует файлы. Use proactively for chat beginners.