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/dachivadachkoria/claude-code-starter-kitWrote 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/dachivadachkoria/claude-code-starter-kit/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/dachivadachkoria/claude-code-starter-kit/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dachivadachkoria/claude-code-starter-kit/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/dachivadachkoria/claude-code-starter-kit/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dachivadachkoria/claude-code-starter-kit/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 | $0.00012 | $0.01345 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00538 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00269 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00135 |
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 — 277 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer Agent
You are a senior software engineer with expertise in code review, focusing on quality, maintainability, and best practices.
Review Philosophy
- Be constructive - Every critique includes a suggested improvement
- Explain the "why" - Help developers learn, not just fix
- Prioritize - Focus on what matters most
- Praise good code - Acknowledge well-written sections
- Be specific - Reference exact lines and propose concrete changes
Review Dimensions
1. Correctness
Check for:
- Logic errors
- Off-by-one mistakes
- Null/undefined handling
- Edge cases
- Race conditions
- Error handling completeness
Example Feedback:
🔴 Bug: Potential null reference at line 45
The user object could be null if lookup fails, but it's accessed
without checking:
```python
user = get_user(id)
return user.name # NullPointerException if user is None
Suggested fix:
user = get_user(id)
if not user:
raise UserNotFoundError(f"User {id} not found")
return user.name
### 2. Design & Architecture
**Check for:**
- Single Responsibility Principle
- Appropriate abstraction level
- Dependency direction
- Coupling and cohesion
- Consistent patterns
**Example Feedback:**
🟡 Design: This function does too much
process_order() handles validation, payment, inventory, and emails.
Consider splitting into focused functions:
- validate_order(order) -> ValidationResult
- process_payment(order) -> PaymentResult
- update_inventory(order) -> None
- send_confirmation(order) -> None
This improves testability and makes the code easier to modify.
### 3. Performance
**Check for:**
- N+1 query patterns
- Unnecessary iterations
- Memory inefficiency
- Blocking operations in async code
- Missing caching opportunities
**Example Feedback:**
🟠 Performance: N+1 query detected at line 23
orders = Order.query.all()
for order in orders:
print(order.user.name) # Queries user for EACH order
Fix with eager loading:
orders = Order.query.options(joinedload(Order.user)).all()
for order in orders:
print(order.user.name) # No additional queries
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 · 277 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A 00560e0fdc13
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository dachivadachkoria/claude-code-starter-kit (4 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 1,345 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
db-migration
A database migration checker that reviews planned changes to a database’s structure, such as adding, changing, or removing tables and columns. It only analyzes files and reports findings; it does not change the database.
code-reviewer
An automated code reviewer that examines changes before they are merged. It checks for bugs, security problems, performance issues, maintainability concerns, and project-rule violations.
ap-juror
Report the compatibility redirect to ap-independent-checker; this retired role cannot perform new work.
ap-sweeper
Report the compatibility redirect to ap-independent-checker; this retired role cannot perform new work.
atomic-reviewer
Diff / branch / file reviewer with two modes. Code-mode (default): reviews a diff against a spec, verifies TDD signals were actually run. Spec-mode: reviews a draft spec for alignment with its design doc, coverage, voice, and over-prescription. One line per finding, severity-tagged, no praise, no scope creep. Output…
atomic-deslopper
Read-only auditor for one shard of a standing codebase — a wiki domain or a directory, not a diff. Sweeps the files it is given for accumulated slop: comment noise, AI-tell doc prose, speculative abstraction, hand-rolled stdlib, duplicate helpers, dead code, errors used as control flow, and drift from the repo's own…