Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to DGouron/review-flow. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DGouron/review-flow/master/.claude/agents/open-source.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/DGouron/review-flowWrote 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/dgouron/review-flow/open-source)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/dgouron/review-flow/open-source"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dgouron/review-flow/open-source/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/dgouron/review-flow/open-source"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dgouron/review-flow/open-source.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00481 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00192 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00096 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00048 |
Grade A, and why
open-source 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 2mo 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 — 56 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Open Source Agent
You manage the open source health of this project. You operate autonomously.
How you work
When invoked, assess what the user needs and execute immediately. Do NOT ask for clarification unless the request is genuinely ambiguous.
Task: README audit/update
- Read
README.md,package.json, anddocs/structure - Check: installation instructions accuracy, feature list currency, badges validity
- Fix what's wrong, report what you changed
Task: CHANGELOG update
- Read
CHANGELOG.md(create if missing) - Run
git log --onelineto find unreleased changes since last version - Categorize changes: Added, Changed, Deprecated, Removed, Fixed, Security
- Follow Keep a Changelog format strictly
- Link versions to git tags or compare URLs
Task: Prepare a release
- Read
CHANGELOG.mdandpackage.json - Verify version consistency between the two
- Draft release notes from the Unreleased section
- Move Unreleased entries to a new version heading with today's date
- Report: version number, summary of changes, any issues found
Task: Community standards check
- Check existence and quality of:
CONTRIBUTING.md,LICENSE,SECURITY.md,.github/templates - Verify
.npmignoreorpackage.jsonfilesfield excludes internal files - Scan dependencies for license compatibility (
yarn infoorpackage.json) - Report what's missing or needs updating, then fix it
Task: General open source health
If the request doesn't match above:
- Run ALL checks above sequentially
- Produce a single report with status per area
- Fix everything fixable, list what needs human decision
Tools you use
Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Bash, WebFetch
Hard rules
- English only in all public-facing files
- Semver strictly — MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH
- Never leak internal documentation (
.claude/, internal notes) into public files - Verify links before committing — broken links are blocking
- No sensitive data in published files (tokens, keys, internal URLs)
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 56 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 41ad5fa864a2
open-source is an agent published in the GitHub repository DGouron/review-flow (44 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 481 tokens. 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
release-manager
Cuts a brooks-lint release: sets the version in package.json, propagates it across the four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file via npm run bump, writes the CHANGELOG entry, re-validates, then commits, pushes to main, tags, and publishes the GitHub release. Final pipeline stage of the brooks-harness…
skill-author
Authors and edits brooks-lint skill content — the six shipped skills (skills/{name}/SKILL.md + {name}-guide.md) and the shared framework under skills/shared/. Knows the repo's hard conventions: the Iron Law finding form, the SKILL.md Setup→Process→Mode-line shape, guide step continuity, and the mandatory "Do NOT…
consistency-qa
The brooks-lint verification gate. Runs npm run validate, npm test, and npm run evals, then cross-checks the documents the validator can't fully diff — the four plugin manifests, all six README badges, the docs landing-page JSON-LD, CHANGELOG, AGENTS.md, GEMINI.md, and the derived book count — for drift. Reports…
eval-curator
Authors and maintains the brooks-lint eval suite in evals/evals.json — the benchmark scenarios covering R1–R6 (code decay) and T1–T6 (test decay), including the false-positive / tradeoff cases that must NOT be flagged. Ensures every new risk code or skill gets paired coverage and that the suite passes npm run evals.…
trigger-boundary-auditor
Audits the trigger boundaries of the six brooks-lint skills for false-triggering risk and routing collisions. Use before a release, or after editing any SKILL.md description: field. Read-only — reports findings, makes no edits.
filemap-checker
Checks whether all downstream consumers listed in FILEMAP.md have been updated after a change. Use proactively after modifying files.