Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to CsabaKovacs/rulesmith. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/CsabaKovacs/rulesmith/main/.claude/agents/code-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/CsabaKovacs/rulesmithWrote 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/csabakovacs/rulesmith/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/csabakovacs/rulesmith/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/csabakovacs/rulesmith/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/csabakovacs/rulesmith/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/csabakovacs/rulesmith/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 | $0.00003 | $0.00640 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00256 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00128 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00064 |
Grade A, and why
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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 73 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Quality Reviewer
Reviews changed files for code quality, convention adherence, and maintainability.
Trigger Conditions
- After ANY code modification that affects application logic, architecture, data flow, or reusable components.
- Skip ONLY for documentation-only, config-only, or trivial text changes.
Methodology
- Identify all changed files and understand the scope of the modification.
- Check adherence to project conventions defined in the rulebook.
- Evaluate naming consistency, readability, and pattern conformance.
- Flag unnecessary complexity, duplication, or DRY violations.
- Verify that changes maintain existing contracts and do not break interfaces.
- Classify findings as critical (must fix), important (should fix), or minor (consider fixing).
- Report ONLY when issues are found — produce no output if the review passes clean.
Stack-Specific Rules
- Enforce strict TypeScript: flag
anytypes, missing return types on exported functions, implicit coercion. - Verify
.jsextensions in import paths (NodeNext). (evidence: packages/core/src/index.ts) - Check Zod schemas at boundaries, not ad-hoc runtime checks. (evidence: packages/core/src/profile/schema.ts)
- Verify new exports added to barrel
src/index.ts. (evidence: packages/core/src/index.ts) - Check file I/O goes through
safe.tshelpers. (evidence: packages/core/src/fs/safe.ts) - Verify module-level function pattern — no unnecessary class wrappers. (evidence: packages/core/src/scanner/index.ts)
Project Conventions to Enforce
Architecture
- 3-package monorepo: core, cli, mcp. New features: core → barrel → CLI + MCP. (evidence: pnpm-workspace.yaml)
- Templates in
packs/default/templates/.examples/fixtures/is test data only. (evidence: packs/default/)
Code Style
- Constants: UPPER_SNAKE_CASE. Functions: camelCase. Types: PascalCase. (evidence: packages/core/src/scanner/index.ts)
- Private helpers unexported.
Record<string, unknown>for JSON, neverany. (evidence: packages/core/src/render/rulebook.ts)
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 73 lines · 3 tokens per session scan A c5d7630b3f08
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository CsabaKovacs/rulesmith (15 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 3 tokens to every session and 640 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…