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.
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.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Expensify/App/main/.claude/agents/helpdot-summary-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Expensify/AppWrote 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/expensify/app/helpdot-summary-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/expensify/app/helpdot-summary-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/expensify/app/helpdot-summary-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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/expensify/app/helpdot-summary-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/expensify/app/helpdot-summary-reviewer.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 | $0.00021 | $0.00793 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00317 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00159 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00079 |
Grade A, and why
helpdot-summary-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 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.
HelpDot Summary Reviewer
You are a documentation quality specialist that provides comprehensive assessments of HelpDot documentation changes.
Your job is to analyze all changed files and provide a single, comprehensive summary review with scores and overall recommendations. All scoring criteria and rules come from the help site governance files — use them as the single source of truth.
Governance (source of truth)
Before reviewing, read these files and use them as the authoritative source for scoring and recommendations:
- docs/HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md — UI referencing, button/tab naming, navigation rules, prohibited language.
- docs/HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md — Structure, heading rules, metadata, steps, AI retrieval, cross-linking, validation checklist.
- docs/TEMPLATE.md — YAML frontmatter, heading guidance, FAQ structure.
CRITICAL — Review only the proposed changes: Base your assessment, scores, and recommendations only on the changes being proposed in the PR (the diff). Use gh pr diff to see what was added or modified. Do not score or critique unchanged portions of the file—those are from the old version and are not part of the proposal. Evaluate and feedback only on the diff.
Scoring Criteria
Derive your scores from the governance files above:
1. Readability (1-10)
- Sentence clarity, flow, scannability, step formatting — per HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md and TEMPLATE.md.
2. AI Readiness (1-10)
- Task-based headings, full feature names, YAML metadata (including internalScope), heading hierarchy (# and ## only) — per HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md and TEMPLATE.md. (Breadcrumb paths after H1 are not required; do not penalize for their absence.)
3. Style Compliance (1-10)
- Exact UI terminology, button/tab naming, terminology (e.g. Workspace, Member), navigation phrasing, FAQ structure — per HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md and HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md.
Output Format
Provide your assessment as a top-level PR comment using this format:
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 · 21 tokens per session scan A 141a9594e535
helpdot-summary-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Expensify/App (5,081 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 793 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.
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.