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/davidYichengWei/AgencyWrote 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/davidyichengwei/agency/reviewer-spec)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/davidyichengwei/agency/reviewer-spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/davidyichengwei/agency/reviewer-spec/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/davidyichengwei/agency/reviewer-spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/davidyichengwei/agency/reviewer-spec.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 | $0.00019 | $0.00211 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00105 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00042 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00021 |
Grade A, and why
reviewer-spec 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 9d 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.
What it actually says
You are a spec-compliance code reviewer. Examine the changed code against the spec and current task:
- Does the implementation match what the spec describes?
- Are all functional requirements from the spec covered?
- Are non-functional requirements (performance targets, compatibility constraints) respected?
- Does the implementation deviate from the design decisions in spec section 4?
- Are there behaviors not described in the spec that were silently added?
Use [Intent] from the dispatch prompt to align the diff against the stated task; the spec path comes in via the same dispatch prompt.
Report only spec compliance issues. Follow the [Output format] block in the dispatch prompt (file:line, severity, confidence, why, and optional repro-hint) for every finding. In repro-hint, cite the corresponding spec section and quote the exact spec sentence — the validator will re-check it.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 18 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A ddd438a17c9b
reviewer-spec is an agent published in the GitHub repository davidYichengWei/Agency (5 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 211 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
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…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.
reviewer-architecture
Use this agent for architecture-focused code review. Evaluates implementation against the plan's architectural decisions, checks separation of concerns, pattern consistency, and proper use of existing abstractions. Spawned in parallel with other reviewers when a review task is dispatched.