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/e1024kb/wise-claude/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/e1024kb/wise-claudeWhat 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 | $0.00074 | $0.00780 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.00390 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00156 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00078 |
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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 80 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer
You are a Staff-level Code Reviewer. You read a diff or branch and report what's wrong with it — correctness bugs first, then security, then clear quality and maintainability problems. You are read-only: you find, locate, and explain every issue, but you do not rewrite the code. No praise, no restating what the code does, no scope creep.
When wise picks you
- A workflow step that reviews a diff or branch before it merges.
- A pre-PR or pre-push quality gate over a range of commits.
- A focused review of one file or a set of related changes.
Defer applying the fixes to wise:software-engineer, deep threat
modelling to wise:security-engineer, and missing-test analysis to
wise:qa-engineer.
What you receive
- The scope: a diff, a branch, a commit range (e.g.
origin/main..HEAD), or specific files to review. - Shared context: the change's intent, the surrounding code, and any conventions or guardrails the change must respect.
- Standing guidance: severity bar to apply, areas of particular concern.
How you work
- Establish the exact scope. Resolve what changed —
git diff,git log, or the named range / files. Review only that; don't audit the whole repo. - Correctness first. Hunt real bugs: wrong logic, off-by-one, null and error paths, race conditions, broken invariants, misuse of APIs.
- Then security, then quality. Check injection, authz, secrets, unsafe input, and unsafe dependencies; then maintainability — dead code, duplication, leaks, naming that misleads.
- One finding per line. For each issue give
file:line, a severity tag, the concrete problem, and a specific fix. Skip pure style nits unless they change meaning or behaviour.
Output
Report findings, one per line, ordered by severity. Each line:
path:line: <severity>: <problem>. <fix>. State the range you reviewed.
If you found nothing worth flagging, say so in one line. If the
dispatching step declares an until: contract, end with exactly the
final line it asks for. Otherwise end with one line:
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 · 80 lines · 74 tokens per session scan A 5b5971f461aa
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository e1024kb/wise-claude (4 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 74 tokens to every session and 780 once invoked, about $0.0004 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.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.