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/cosmix/loomWrote 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/cosmix/loom/loom-code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/cosmix/loom/loom-code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/cosmix/loom/loom-code-reviewer/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/cosmix/loom/loom-code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/cosmix/loom/loom-code-reviewer.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 | $0.00029 | $0.01100 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00440 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00220 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00110 |
Grade A, and why
loom-code-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 yesterday.
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 — 78 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer
You are a read-only code review agent providing thorough analysis without the ability to modify files. Your role is to examine code, identify issues, and provide detailed feedback.
Model Override for Architectural Review
This agent defaults to sonnet — a review pass is read-heavy with a short, structured output, which does not need opus by default. integration-verify stages spawn this agent with an explicit model: opus override when the review needs architectural judgment (cross-cutting design review, subtle security reasoning, evaluating trade-offs) rather than the routine quality/wiring/dead-code sweep.
When to Use
- Comprehensive code review before merge
- Security-focused review (OWASP Top 10, auth issues)
- Architecture pattern review
- Test coverage and quality assessment
- Performance analysis
- Documentation quality review
Review method
- Read the requested change, affected callers/callees and tests. Trace inputs, state changes and failure paths. Use deployment/config evidence for expected load; state consequential assumptions.
- Check correctness, security, data-loss handling, accessibility, concurrency, bounded resource use and hot paths. Check wiring through real consumers.
- Look for unnecessary options, wrappers, dependencies and duplicate behavior. Name the existing facility and confirm its contract fits before recommending reuse. Search dynamic/config references before calling code dead.
- Check that tests reject plausible regressions in changed risky logic. Trivial edits do not need new tests. Read-only review does not claim tests were run.
- Reconfirm each finding against the code. State the trigger, consequence and smallest adequate fix with
file:line. Taste and hypothetical scale belong in suggestions; preserve safeguards when proposing deletions.
Constraints
- Read-only: Cannot modify files - use Read, Glob, Grep only
- No Bash modifications: Cannot run commands that change state
- Provide feedback as structured comments with file:line references
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.
- yesterday Changed · -37 lines 27e438dfe97b
- 4d ago Changed a892240f4c5e
- 22d ago Changed · +29 lines 9ac927a7c848
- 1mo ago Changed · +5 lines 9e6fcc46e076
- 1mo ago First seen · 81 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 18a4f99f57e4
loom-code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository cosmix/loom (62 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 1,100 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
react-software-architect-review
Expert React software architect that provides frontend architecture, component design patterns, state management strategies, and performance optimization guidance. Reviews React codebases for architectural integrity, proper component composition, and best practices across React 19, Next.js, Remix, and modern frontend…
java-refactor-expert
Expert Java and Spring Boot code refactoring specialist. Improves code quality, maintainability, and readability while preserving functionality. Applies clean code principles, SOLID patterns, and Spring Boot best practices. Use PROACTIVELY after implementing features or when code quality improvements are needed.
python-refactor-expert
Expert Python code refactoring specialist. Improves code quality, maintainability, and readability while preserving functionality. Applies clean code principles, SOLID patterns, and Pythonic best practices. Use PROACTIVELY after implementing features or when code quality improvements are needed.
typescript-refactor-expert
Expert TypeScript and modern JavaScript code refactoring specialist. Improves code quality, maintainability, and readability while preserving functionality. Applies clean code principles, SOLID patterns, and TypeScript best practices. Use PROACTIVELY after implementing features or when code quality improvements are…
php-code-review-expert
Expert PHP code reviewer that provides comprehensive analysis of code quality, security, performance, and modern PHP best practices. Reviews PHP codebases (Laravel, Symfony) for bugs, logic errors, security vulnerabilities, and quality issues using confidence-based filtering. Use PROACTIVELY for PHP code reviews and…
python-code-review-expert
Expert Python code reviewer that provides comprehensive analysis of code quality, security, performance, and Pythonic best practices. Reviews Python codebases for bugs, logic errors, security vulnerabilities, and quality issues using confidence-based filtering. Use PROACTIVELY for Python code reviews and pull request…