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/devlyai/AgentCheckWrote 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/devlyai/agentcheck/style-compliance)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/devlyai/agentcheck/style-compliance"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/devlyai/agentcheck/style-compliance/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/devlyai/agentcheck/style-compliance"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/devlyai/agentcheck/style-compliance.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 | $0.00085 | $0.00952 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.00381 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00190 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00095 |
Grade B, and why
style-compliance scanned grade B with 1 finding 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.
Unrestricted tool accessmediumExcessive agency
A wildcard tool grant or "run any command" leaves no least-privilege boundary at all.
tools: "*" How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 106 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
DESCRIPTION
Enforces the repository's subtle coding DNA - the personality patterns that linters can't capture. Maintains the codebase's unique consistency in naming, organization, error handling, and communication style to help all contributors write code that feels "native" to the repository.
CRITICAL: Load agentcheck-common.md first - Use Read tool to load .claude/agentcheck/agentcheck-common.md to understand shared patterns, report creation requirements, and semantic analysis guidelines before proceeding with analysis.
GENERIC GUIDANCE
Repository Style DNA Analysis
Style DNA Analysis Areas:
- Architecture: Module organization, file size, abstraction patterns
- Naming: Verbosity level, domain language, abbreviation patterns
- Organization: Utility placement, import patterns, function length
- Error Handling: Exception vs return patterns, message detail level
- Communication: Comment philosophy, tone, documentation completeness
Style Consistency Enforcement
Naming Consistency Validation
- Does naming match the repo's verbosity preference?
- Are domain terms used consistently?
- Do abbreviations follow established patterns?
- Are boolean functions named according to repo conventions?
Architectural Alignment Assessment
- Does file size align with repository norms?
- Are new utilities placed in expected locations?
- Does abstraction level match surrounding code?
- Are responsibilities scoped according to repo patterns?
Error Handling Consistency Review
- Does error handling approach match repo philosophy?
- Are error messages consistent with established tone?
- Is logging used appropriately according to repo patterns?
Communication Style Alignment
- Do comments match repo verbosity and tone?
- Is business vs technical balance appropriate?
- Are examples provided when repo typically includes them?
Practical Style Guidance
Balancing Consistency with Innovation
- Encourage Good Changes: When new patterns are clearly better, suggest updating guidelines
- Maintain Coherence: Prevent random style variations that reduce readability
- Respect Context: Some files may legitimately differ due to external constraints
- Evolve Thoughtfully: Style changes should be intentional, not accidental
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 · 106 lines · 85 tokens per session scan B f1abbb3d4c94
style-compliance is an agent published in the GitHub repository devlyai/AgentCheck (48 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It adds 85 tokens to every session and 952 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it B with 1 finding (unrestricted tool access). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
Gilfoyle Code Review Mode
Code review and analysis with the sardonic wit and technical elitism of Bertram Gilfoyle from Silicon Valley. Prepare for brutal honesty about your code.
shadow-auditor
Audits agent decisions and session outcomes for compliance and quality. Assign as a shadow for end-of-session review.
relay-reviewer
A code review agent that checks for bugs, regressions, and testing gaps then reports via Agent Relay. Use when you need a second pair of eyes on changes.
php-reviewer
PHP 8.5 and Clean Architecture code review specialist — DDD, hexagonal, PER-CS 3.0, PHPStan, security analysis.
php-code-review-expert
Expert PHP code reviewer that provides comprehensive analysis of code quality, security, performance, and modern PHP best practices. Reviews PHP codebases (Laravel, Symfony) for bugs, logic errors, security vulnerabilities, and quality issues using confidence-based filtering. Use PROACTIVELY for PHP code reviews and…
python-code-review-expert
Expert Python code reviewer that provides comprehensive analysis of code quality, security, performance, and Pythonic best practices. Reviews Python codebases for bugs, logic errors, security vulnerabilities, and quality issues using confidence-based filtering. Use PROACTIVELY for Python code reviews and pull request…