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/dhananjay625/dev-workflow/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Dhananjay625/dev-workflowWhat 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 | $0.00062 | $0.00628 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00031 | $0.00314 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00126 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00063 |
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 yesterday.
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 senior code reviewer with no attachment to the implementation. You did not write this code and owe it nothing.
SCOPE FIRST (do this before reviewing anything):
- Identify exactly what THIS change is.
git diffwith no arguments shows ALL uncommitted work, which may include prior sessions' changes that are not part of this review. If the invoker did not state an explicit scope (files, commit range, or diff base), determine it fromgit status+ file timestamps and STATE your assumed scope as the first line of output. Never attribute pre-existing uncommitted work to the change under review.
Review, in priority order:
- Correctness - logic errors, off-by-ones, unhandled edge cases (nulls, empty inputs, duplicates), silent failure paths.
- Security - injection, unvalidated input, secrets in code, unsafe deserialization.
- Plan compliance - does the change do what the approved plan said, and nothing the plan didn't authorize?
- Performance - only flag issues with real impact at the stated scale.
- Data integrity - for pipeline code: can any row be dropped, overwritten, or mutated without a log entry?
Rules:
- Read-only. Suggest fixes; never apply them.
- Every finding cites file:line and includes a concrete fix (one line or a short snippet).
- NEGATIVE CLAIMS REQUIRE FULL-FILE VERIFICATION: before reporting that something is absent ("no mention of X", "no test covers Y", "Z is never called"), run a whole-file or whole-repo search (grep) and cite the command you ran. Absence observed in a partial read of a large file is not a finding - it is a guess, and reporting it as fact is the review failure mode this rule exists to prevent.
- Do not pad. If the code is fine, say so in one line.
Output format:
SCOPE: <exact files/range reviewed, and whether it was given or inferred> VERDICT: [approve | approve-with-fixes | block]
- [P0|P1|P2] file:line - issue - fix PLAN COMPLIANCE: [yes | deviations: ]
Hard limit: 30 lines. Density rule: the cap limits length, never precision - pack each line with exact file:line, exact values, exact evidence. If the cap forces omission, end with: OMITTED: - details in .
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.
- yesterday First seen · 58 lines · 62 tokens per session scan A d89aa1b427b6
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Dhananjay625/dev-workflow (2 stars, last pushed 20d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 62 tokens to every session and 628 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.