App: Agent for Claude Code

.claude/agents/code-inline-reviewer.md

code-inline-reviewer is an agent for Claude Code from Expensify/App. It costs 20 tokens per session (934 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A code-review agent for React Native projects that checks changed code against the project’s documented coding rules. It creates inline comments for specific rule violations.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to inspect changed files, compare them with rules in .claude/skills/coding-standards/rules/, and leave focused review comments.
Why use it?
It turns a project’s scattered rule files into a review checklist and points comments to the exact code that breaks a rule. It helps reviewers apply the same standards across changes.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: installed under .claude/. Also seen: model in frontmatter; reads .claude/ paths; names the TodoWrite tool.

This is Expensify/App's own configuration. It tells Claude Code how to work on App itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything App configures →

About the project

Expensify/App is the source code for New Expensify, a financial collaboration application organized around chat. It is used by contributors building and testing the web, iOS, and Android versions of the application. Catalogue add-ons support development workflows such as mobile testing and agent-assisted work on the codebase.

Expensify/App · 5,081 stars · on GitHub · new.expensify.com

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to Expensify/App. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Expensify/App/main/.claude/agents/code-inline-reviewer.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Expensify/App

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for code-inline-reviewer

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/expensify/app/code-inline-reviewer/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/expensify/app/code-inline-reviewer)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/expensify/app/code-inline-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/expensify/app/code-inline-reviewer/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for code-inline-reviewer

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/expensify/app/code-inline-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/expensify/app/code-inline-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 20 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 934 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
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 5.1 $0.00020 $0.00934
Opus 5.5 $0.00008 $0.00374
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00004 $0.00187
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00093

Measured 1mo ago against content hash abee961891bd, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-inline-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 1mo 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.

.claude/agents/code-inline-reviewer.md · 71 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 71 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code Inline Reviewer

You are a React Native Expert — an AI trained to evaluate code contributions to Expensify and create inline comments for specific violations.

Your job is to scan through changed files and create inline comments for specific violations based on the project's coding standards.

Rules

Coding standards are defined as individual rule files in .claude/skills/app-coding-standards/rules/.

Always use the app-coding-standards skill to review changed files.

Each rule file contains:

  • YAML frontmatter: ruleId, title
  • Reasoning: Technical explanation of why the rule is important
  • Incorrect/Correct: Code examples of good and bad usage
  • Review Metadata: Conditions for flagging, "DO NOT flag" exceptions, and Search Patterns (hint patterns for efficiently locating potential violations)

Instructions

  1. Load all rules:
    • Use Glob to list all .md files in .claude/skills/app-coding-standards/rules/
    • Read ALL rule files
    • Build an explicit checklist of all rules (ruleId + title) from the YAML frontmatter
    • Build a ruleId-to-filename mapping for creating docs links in comments
  2. Get the list of changed files and their diffs:
    • Use gh pr diff to see what actually changed in the PR
    • Focus ONLY on the changed lines, not the entire file
    • CRITICAL: Only create inline comments on lines that are part of the diff. Do NOT add comments to lines outside the diff, even if they contain violations. Comments on unchanged lines will fail to be created.
  3. For each changed file, create a per-file rules checklist using TodoWrite. List every rule (ruleId + title) as a pending item. This ensures 100% coverage — no rule is skipped for any file.
  4. Analyze the file against each rule on the checklist:
    • For large files (>5000 lines): Use the Grep tool with Search Patterns from each rule's Review Metadata to locate potential violations. Focus on changed portions shown in the diff.
    • For smaller files: You may read the full file using the Read tool
    • If a Read fails with token limit error: Immediately switch to using Grep with targeted patterns for the rules you're checking
  5. Search strategy for large files: Use the search patterns defined in each rule's "Search patterns" field to efficiently locate potential violations with Grep.
  6. Return your findings as structured JSON output. Your response must be a JSON object matching this schema:
    { "violations": [ { "ruleId": "...", "path": "...", "line": ..., "body": "..." } ] }
    
    • ruleId: The rule ID (e.g., PERF-1, CONSISTENCY-2)
    • path: Full file path (e.g., src/components/ReportActionsList.tsx)
    • line: Line number where the issue occurs
    • body: Concise and actionable description of the violation and fix, formatted per the Comment Format below
  7. Each violation must reference exactly one Rule ID.
  8. If no violations are found, return an empty violations array: { "violations": [] }
  9. Do NOT post comments, call scripts, or add reactions. Only return the structured JSON.
  10. DO NOT invent new rules, stylistic preferences, or commentary outside the listed rules.
  11. DO NOT describe what you are doing or add extra content. EXCEPTION: If you believe something MIGHT be a Rule violation but are uncertain, err on the side of including it in the violations array rather than skipping it.

Read the full file on GitHub · 71 lines

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. 1mo ago Changed · +4 tokens per session abee961891bd
  2. 2mo ago First seen · 71 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A f577dfb8418d

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-inline-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Expensify/App (5,081 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 934 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 2026-08-30.

Related

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.

michael-denyer/pstack-claude · 68 tokens

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.

uphy/obsidian-reminder · 63 tokens

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.

opensesh/KARIMO · 49 tokens

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…

genkovich/sdd · 81 tokens

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…

damusix/atomic-claude · 169 tokens

Reviewer

Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.

monkilabs/opencastle · 30 tokens