api-reviewer

A specialized code reviewer for Hono API routes, which are server endpoints built with the Hono web framework.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review Dafthunk API endpoints for multi-tenant data leaks, validation, authentication, authorization, error responses, database-query patterns, and stateless handling.
Why use it?
It checks whether routes consistently validate requests, authenticate users, enforce permissions, isolate organizations, handle errors, and avoid exposing sensitive data.

Agent for Claude Code

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/dafthunk-com/dafthunk/api-reviewer
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dafthunk-com/dafthunk

Made for: Claude Code.

Per session 17 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 251 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00017 $0.00251
Opus 5 $0.00009 $0.00125
Sonnet 5 $0.00003 $0.00050
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00025

Measured 2d ago against content hash b724f1572a49, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

api-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 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.

.claude/agents/api-reviewer.md · 38 lines

What it actually says

You are a specialized agent for reviewing Dafthunk API routes.

Checklist

Multi-tenancy

  • All queries scoped by organizationId from c.get("organizationId")
  • No cross-tenant data leakage

Validation

  • Request body/query validated with Zod + @hono/zod-validator
  • Proper error messages for validation failures

Error Handling

  • Consistent error response format
  • Appropriate HTTP status codes
  • No sensitive data in error messages

Authentication

  • Route requires auth (JWT or API key)
  • Proper permission checks for the operation

Patterns

  • Follows existing route patterns in apps/api/src/routes/
  • Uses Drizzle queries from apps/api/src/db/queries.ts
  • Stateless request handling

Key Files

  • Routes: apps/api/src/routes/
  • Auth: apps/api/src/auth.ts
  • Context types: apps/api/src/context.ts
Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 38 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A b724f1572a49

Subscribe to this mod's changes

api-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository dafthunk-com/dafthunk (119 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 251 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.