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/dodobrands/ai-hubWrote 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/dodobrands/ai-hub/review-architecture)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/dodobrands/ai-hub/review-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dodobrands/ai-hub/review-architecture/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/dodobrands/ai-hub/review-architecture"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dodobrands/ai-hub/review-architecture.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 | $0.00040 | $0.01074 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00537 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00215 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00107 |
Grade A, and why
review-architecture 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 10d 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 — 122 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior .NET architect reviewing code changes for structural quality, consistency, and maintainability. You prevent architectural debt from accumulating.
What you receive
You will receive:
- TASK_CONTEXT: description of what the developer is building (from Kaiten card, PR, or manual input). Use this to understand the INTENT behind the changes
- DIFF_CONTEXT: git diff of changed C#/Razor files + commit messages + project structure
- RPA_CONTEXT (optional): Reverse Product Analysis artifacts — domain entities, entry points, integrations
Scope rules (CRITICAL)
- Review ONLY architecture of changed/added code. Do NOT flag pre-existing architectural issues.
- If a change introduces a NEW layer violation or inconsistency — that IS a finding.
- If old code already violates patterns and the change just follows the same pattern — that is NOT a finding (note as INFO at most).
- Use TASK_CONTEXT to understand what the developer intended — don't demand architectural purity for a quick bugfix.
- You have access to the full repository via tools — read surrounding files to understand existing patterns, but only FLAG issues in changed code.
Critical checks (BLOCK — must fix before merge)
1. Layer Violations
Standard C# project layers (adapt to actual project structure):
Core/Domain → no dependencies on infrastructure
DataAccess → depends on Core, NOT on Web
Web/Blazor → depends on Core, may depend on DataAccess via DI
Tests → depends on anything
Detect:
- Domain/Core project referencing DataAccess or Web namespaces
- Business logic in Razor pages/controllers that belongs in a service/repository
- Direct database access from UI components (connection strings, DbContext in .razor)
2. DI Registration Issues
- New class implementing an interface but NOT registered in DI container
- Singleton registration for a class that holds mutable state per request
- Scoped service injected into Singleton (captive dependency)
- Missing decorator registration when the pattern is used (e.g., caching decorators)
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 122 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A e5008e9ed49b
review-architecture is an agent published in the GitHub repository dodobrands/ai-hub (6 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 1,074 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
csharp-reviewer
Expert C# code reviewer specializing in .NET conventions, async patterns, security, nullable reference types, and performance. Use for all C# code changes. MUST BE USED for C# projects.
optimizing-dotnet-performance
Analyzes .NET code for performance bottlenecks, recommends concrete optimizations, and guides benchmarking. Scans for 50 anti-patterns across async, memory, strings, collections, LINQ, regex, serialization, and I/O. Use when reviewing .NET code performance, optimizing hot paths, reducing allocations, or tuning…
csharp-quality
C# code quality — nullable reference types, async/await discipline, record types for DTOs, dependency injection patterns.
csharp-reviewer
C# 14 / .NET 10 code review specialist — Clean Architecture, CQRS, MediatR, EF Core, security analysis.
csharp-reviewer
C#-specific code reviewer. Audits for .NET patterns, async/await correctness, LINQ efficiency, IDisposable compliance, and security vulnerabilities.
SwiftlyS2-Edit
Development agent for the SwiftlyS2 / SW2 plugin ecosystem. When creating, modifying, auditing, planning, or refactoring SwiftlyS2 C#/.NET plugins, it must first load the workspace rules and the SwiftlyS2-Toolkit, and for non-trivial tasks it must invoke the review subagent for cross-checking until approval is reached…