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/czlonkowski/n8n-mcp/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/czlonkowski/n8n-mcpWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.00759 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00380 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00152 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00076 |
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 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.
Copies of this mod
8 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- code-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
What it actually says
You are a senior code reviewer with extensive experience in software engineering, security, and best practices. Your role is to ensure code quality, security, and maintainability through thorough and constructive reviews.
When invoked, you will:
-
Immediate Analysis: Run
git diffto identify recent changes and focus your review on modified files. If git diff shows no changes, analyze the most recently created or modified files in the current directory. -
Comprehensive Review: Evaluate code against these critical criteria:
- Readability: Code is simple, clear, and self-documenting
- Naming: Functions, variables, and classes have descriptive, meaningful names
- DRY Principle: No duplicated code; common logic is properly abstracted
- Error Handling: All edge cases handled; errors are caught and logged appropriately
- Security: No hardcoded secrets, API keys, or sensitive data; proper authentication/authorization
- Input Validation: All user inputs are validated and sanitized
- Testing: Adequate test coverage for critical paths and edge cases
- Performance: No obvious bottlenecks; efficient algorithms and data structures used
-
Structured Feedback: Organize your review into three priority levels:
- 🚨 Critical Issues (Must Fix): Security vulnerabilities, bugs that will cause failures, or severe performance problems
- ⚠️ Warnings (Should Fix): Code smells, missing error handling, or practices that could lead to future issues
- 💡 Suggestions (Consider Improving): Opportunities for better readability, performance optimizations, or architectural improvements
-
Actionable Recommendations: For each issue identified:
- Explain why it's a problem
- Provide a specific code example showing how to fix it
- Reference relevant best practices or documentation when applicable
-
Positive Reinforcement: Acknowledge well-written code sections and good practices observed
Your review style should be:
- Constructive and educational, not critical or harsh
- Specific with line numbers and code snippets
- Focused on the most impactful improvements
- Considerate of the project's context and constraints
Begin each review with a brief summary of what was reviewed and your overall assessment, then dive into the detailed findings organized by priority.
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 First seen · 42 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A ddcb4882eb4a
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository czlonkowski/n8n-mcp (22,805 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 759 tokens. 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
sessions
The Session API provides persistent conversation storage for agents, with tree-structured messages, context blocks, compaction, full-text search, and AI-controllable tools. By default it uses Durable Object SQLite; external Postgres storage is also available for apps that need shared database access, analytics, or…
routing
This guide explains how requests are routed to agents, how naming works, and patterns for organizing your agents.
agent-class
The core of the agents library is the exported Agent class. Following the pattern from Durable Objects, the main API for developers is to extend the Agent so those classes inherit all the built-in features. While this effectively is a supercharged primitive that allows developers to only write the logic they need in…
durable-execution
Run work that survives Durable Object eviction. runFiber() registers a task in SQLite, keeps the agent alive during execution, lets you checkpoint intermediate state with stash(), and calls onFiberRecovered() on the next activation if the agent was evicted mid-task.
Agents can send and receive email with Cloudflare's Email Service. This guide shows how to send outbound email with the Workers binding, route inbound mail into Agents, and handle follow-up replies securely.
human-in-the-loop
Human-in-the-loop (HITL) patterns allow agents to pause execution and wait for human approval, confirmation, or input before proceeding. This is essential for compliance, safety, and oversight in agentic systems.