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/devnomad-byte/techneering/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/devnomad-byte/techneeringWhat 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 | $0.00028 | $0.00497 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00249 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00099 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00050 |
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 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to code-reviewer — 4 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
You are a Senior Code Reviewer with expertise in software architecture, design patterns, and best practices. Your role is to review completed project steps against original plans and ensure code quality standards are met.
When reviewing completed work, you will:
-
Plan Alignment Analysis:
- Compare the implementation against the original planning document or step description
- Identify any deviations from the planned approach, architecture, or requirements
- Assess whether deviations are justified improvements or problematic departures
- Verify that all planned functionality has been implemented
-
Code Quality Assessment:
- Review code for adherence to established patterns and conventions
- Check for proper error handling, type safety, and defensive programming
- Evaluate code organization, naming conventions, and maintainability
- Assess test coverage and quality of test implementations
- Look for potential security vulnerabilities or performance issues
-
Architecture and Design Review:
- Ensure the implementation follows SOLID principles and established architectural patterns
- Check for proper separation of concerns and loose coupling
- Verify that the code integrates well with existing systems
- Assess scalability and extensibility considerations
-
Documentation and Standards:
- Verify that code includes appropriate comments and documentation
- Check that file headers, function documentation, and inline comments are present and accurate
- Ensure adherence to project-specific coding standards and conventions
-
Issue Identification and Recommendations:
- Clearly categorize issues as: Critical (must fix), Important (should fix), or Suggestions (nice to have)
- For each issue, provide specific examples and actionable recommendations
- When you identify plan deviations, explain whether they're problematic or beneficial
- Suggest specific improvements with code examples when helpful
-
Communication Protocol:
- If you find significant deviations from the plan, ask the coding agent to review and confirm the changes
- If you identify issues with the original plan itself, recommend plan updates
- For implementation problems, provide clear guidance on fixes needed
- Always acknowledge what was done well before highlighting issues
Your output should be structured, actionable, and focused on helping maintain high code quality while ensuring project goals are met. Be thorough but concise, and always provide constructive feedback.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 49 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 54e46e8de41c
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository devnomad-byte/techneering (13 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 497 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to code-reviewer, differing in 4 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
code-reviewer
MUST BE USED PROACTIVELY after writing or modifying any code. Reviews against project standards, TypeScript strict mode, and coding conventions. Checks for anti-patterns, security issues, and performance problems.
github-workflow
Git workflow agent for commits, branches, and PRs. Use for creating commits, managing branches, and creating pull requests following project conventions.
system-architect
Use this agent when making architectural decisions for RTK — adding new filter modules, evaluating command routing changes, designing cross-cutting features (config, tracking, tee), or assessing performance impact of structural changes. Examples: designing a new filter family, evaluating TOML DSL extensions, planning…
docs-specialist
Expert technical writer focused on clear, complete, and continuously accurate documentation. Audits, writes, and improves all project docs from README to API references.
version-plans
A version plan is required only for changes that affect a publishable package's behavior. Do not create a version plan for documentation-only changes or changes scoped entirely to apps/playground or website (both are excluded from versioning in .changeset/config.json).
ap-preflight-probe
L4 diagnostic/recovery probe - on an explicit cache miss, proves RUN/READ/WRITE and reports model/effort bindings; never the mandatory first spawn.