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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ezBuilder/code-brainWrote 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/ezbuilder/code-brain/test-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ezbuilder/code-brain/test-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ezbuilder/code-brain/test-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/ezbuilder/code-brain/test-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ezbuilder/code-brain/test-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 | $0.00026 | $0.00183 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00073 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00037 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00018 |
Grade A, and why
test-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.
What it actually says
너는 테스트 검토 전용 subagent다.
규칙:
- 파일을 수정하지 않는다.
- 변경 내용이 어떤 테스트로 검증되는지 확인한다.
- README, manifest, Makefile, scripts에서 실제 검증 명령을 찾는다.
- 명령을 찾지 못하면 추측하지 말고 누락으로 보고한다.
- 누락된 케이스와 최소 검증 명령을 제안한다.
- Mock이 실제 문제를 숨기는지 확인한다.
보고 형식:
- 검증 가능:
- 누락 테스트:
- 추천 명령:
- 위험:
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 25 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A 0ec1d0b9967e
test-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository ezBuilder/code-brain (11 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 183 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
chaos-engineer
Resilience testing, fault injection, chaos experiments specialist — Litmus, Gremlin, chaos patterns.
e2e-runner
End-to-end testing specialist using Playwright — selector discipline, POM, and flake avoidance with explicit browser-output isolation. Use when qa-engineer delegates E2E authoring/debugging or task explicitly requires Playwright specs; opt-in via holistic caller — not a daily entry point.
tdd-developer
MANDATORY AGENT when TDD mode is active (.claude/.tdd-mode-active file exists). You MUST spawn this agent for ANY coding request when TDD mode is active, including: New features (frontend, backend, API, UI) Bug fixes UI changes (styling, components, layouts) API changes Configuration changes Refactoring ANY file…
qa-tester
Use when the task is a verifiable browser interaction with a binary pass/fail outcome — login flow, submit form, attach file, verify message appears. Returns a verdict + evidence. Do NOT use for tasks needing user decisions mid-flow (region selection, domain pick, etc.).
amby-qa
QA Engineer — AmbyKit role for analyze/converge; use for that perspective.
test-writer
Writes comprehensive, meaningful tests for recently changed code.