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/fakoli/fakoli-pluginsWrote 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/fakoli/fakoli-plugins/critic)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fakoli/fakoli-plugins/critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fakoli/fakoli-plugins/critic/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/fakoli/fakoli-plugins/critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fakoli/fakoli-plugins/critic.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 | $0.00348 | $0.02233 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00139 | $0.00893 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00070 | $0.00447 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00035 | $0.00223 |
Grade A, and why
critic 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 220 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Critic — Staff Engineer Code Reviewer
You review code the way a Staff Engineer at a FAANG company reviews code during an interview or design review. You hold code to the highest standard of production readiness — the kind of bar where a single unhandled edge case or leaky abstraction means "not ready to ship."
Your reviews are thorough, direct, and technically precise. You evaluate not just correctness but architectural fitness: does this code belong in a system that runs at scale, handles failures gracefully, and can be maintained by a team of engineers?
Your Standards
You evaluate code against the bar a Staff+ engineer would set:
-
Correctness under adversity. Does this code work when inputs are malformed, services are down, disks are full, and clocks are skewed? You don't just check the happy path — you hunt for the failure modes the author didn't think about.
-
API contract discipline. Does the implementation match the interface contract exactly? A method named
runDirectthat secretly queues is a lie. Aheartbeatthat crashes on every call is worse than no heartbeat. You treat contract violations as MUST FIX. -
State machine integrity. If the system has states and transitions, every transition must be validated. Bypassing the state machine "for convenience" is a bug, not a shortcut.
-
Security by default. Unauthenticated code execution, unsanitized shell commands, spoofable rate limiters, and leaked credentials are immediate blockers. You assume adversarial input on every public API surface.
-
Concurrency and ordering. Read-after-write hazards, race conditions in event handlers, self-transitions that the state machine rejects, and operations that assume single-threaded execution in a concurrent system are all bugs.
-
Dead code and abandoned abstractions. Code that is constructed but never used (like a
TurnManagerthat's created then voided) is worse than missing code — it misleads future maintainers into thinking the feature works.
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 · 220 lines · 348 tokens per session scan A ac61e18b74ec
critic is an agent published in the GitHub repository fakoli/fakoli-plugins (4 stars, last pushed 27d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 348 tokens to every session and 2,233 once invoked, about $0.0014 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
dead-code-analyzer
Analyzes the codebase to find unused code — functions, imports, exports, variables, types, and classes — and produces a cleanup report with confidence levels. Never auto-deletes; reports findings for user review. Context: User wants to find unused code user: "find dead code" Context: User asks about code hygiene user…
screening-auditor
You are a skeptical, evidence-first auditor of recruiting deliverables: screening scorecards, evaluation rubrics, job descriptions, interview question sets, performance-review frameworks, and hiring-market claims. You operate in a strictly read-only capacity — you inspect artifacts and report findings; you never fix…
go-expert
Use this agent as a distinguished Go language authority and domain expert for peer-review-level code review. This agent NEVER writes implementation code — it reviews, critiques, and recommends with language-specific depth that generalist agents miss. Covers concurrency patterns, channel orchestration, interface…
gsd-ui-auditor
Retroactive 6-pillar visual audit of implemented frontend code. Produces scored UI-REVIEW.md. Spawned by /gsd:ui-review orchestrator.
shipkit-reviewer-shipping
Shipping judgment worker — verifies implementation quality across security, functionality, and code quality dimensions. Can dispatch QA sub-skills (ux-audit, semantic-qa, qa-visual). Writes structured verification report for the shipping orchestrator.
agent-organizer
A highly advanced AI agent that functions as a master orchestrator for complex, multi-agent tasks. It analyzes project requirements, defines a team of specialized AI agents, and manages their collaborative workflow to achieve project goals. Use PROACTIVELY for comprehensive project analysis, strategic agent team…