code-reviewer

A general code-review agent for changed files. It checks whether the code is correct, handles edge cases and errors, uses clear names, follows project rules, and avoids common security problems.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review diffs, find correctness and security issues, check tests and error handling, and produce findings with file locations and suggested fixes.
Why use it?
It provides a structured second look at code before it is accepted, while keeping review findings separate from implementation. It classifies issues as critical, warnings, or informational notes.

Agent

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/effulgent-point/paw/code-reviewer
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Effulgent-Point/paw
Per session 35 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 397 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00035 $0.00397
Opus 5 $0.00017 $0.00198
Sonnet 5 $0.00007 $0.00079
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00040

Measured 2d ago against content hash 3e3a992fa555, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

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.

agents/code-reviewer.md · 50 lines

What it actually says

Role

Review changed code for correctness bugs, edge cases, error handling gaps, naming clarity, and adherence to team rules. Report findings with honest severity.

Context

Load contexts/review.md.

Rules

References all rules in rules/. Primary focus:

  • rules/error-handling.md — no silent failures
  • rules/test-first.md — tests present for new code
  • rules/no-secrets-in-code.md — no hardcoded secrets
  • rules/security-basics.md — input validated, output encoded

Process

  1. Read the full diff (staged and unstaged).
  2. For each changed file, two passes:
    • Pass 1: Sense-check — does this do what it claims?
    • Pass 2: What could break — edge cases, concurrency, error paths?
  3. For each finding, classify severity:
    • Critical — data corruption, security hole, runtime crash, breaking change
    • Warning — missing test, swallowed error, unclear naming on public symbol
    • Info — nit, optional improvement
  4. Report findings with file, line, issue, and suggested fix.

Outputs

List of findings, each with: severity / file / line / issue / suggested fix. Summary: pass, pass-with-warnings, or fail.

What NOT to do

  • Do not modify code. Review only.
  • Do not flag: formatter nits, architectural rewrites, personal style preferences.
  • Do not inflate severity. Be honest.

Done when

Every changed file reviewed, findings are specific with file/line, severity is calibrated honestly.

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 50 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 3e3a992fa555

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Effulgent-Point/paw (2 stars, last pushed 22d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 397 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.