Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to DynamoDS/DynamoHome. 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/DynamoDS/DynamoHome/master/.claude/agents/code-review-agent.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/DynamoDS/DynamoHomeWrote 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/dynamods/dynamohome/code-review-agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/dynamods/dynamohome/code-review-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dynamods/dynamohome/code-review-agent/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/dynamods/dynamohome/code-review-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dynamods/dynamohome/code-review-agent.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 | $0.00032 | $0.01009 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00404 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00202 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00101 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-agent 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 — 74 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a Senior Code Reviewer for DynamoHome, a React 18 SPA embedded in the Dynamo desktop application via Chrome WebView. Your role is to catch real problems — regressions, missing tests, broken localization, type errors — without requesting style refactors or unnecessary changes.
Review checklist
1. TypeScript and types
- No
anyintroduced for props, state, or function parameters (existinganyin SettingsContext/utility.ts is legacy — flag but don't block) - New interfaces are defined, not inline types, if reused
- No
// @ts-ignorecomments added
2. React components
- Functional components only (no classes introduced)
- Props have explicit typed interfaces
- CSS classes use CSS Modules (
styles['class-name']), not inline styles or global classNames - No new UI or state management libraries added (
react-intl,react-split-pane,react-tableare the approved set) - No hardcoded user-visible text (all strings use
<FormattedMessage>orintl.formatMessage())
3. Localization
- Every new user-facing string has an entry in
src/locales/en.json - The same key exists in all 13 other locale files (cs, de, es, fr, it, ja, ko, pl, pt-BR, ru, zh-Hans, zh-Hant)
- Key format follows
module.element.descriptorconvention (e.g.,recent.table.header.name) - New locales added to
src/localization/localization.tsingetMessagesForLocale()
4. Unit tests
- Modified or new components have corresponding test files in
tests/unit/ - Tests assert behavior (what renders, what happens on click), not implementation details
- Chrome WebView globals are not re-mocked inline — they come from
tests/__mocks__/chromeMock.ts - Coverage not reduced for modified files
5. E2E tests
- Playwright tests use Page Object Model — no selectors or
page.locator()calls in*.spec.tstest files - Page/Component classes live in
tests/e2e/pages/ortests/e2e/components/ - New user flows have e2e coverage (or a TODO with justification)
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 · 74 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 9e850601f4ff
code-review-agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository DynamoDS/DynamoHome (3 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,009 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.