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/fall-out-bug/sdpWrote 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/fall-out-bug/sdp/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fall-out-bug/sdp/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fall-out-bug/sdp/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/fall-out-bug/sdp/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fall-out-bug/sdp/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 | $0.00017 | $0.00686 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00274 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00137 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00069 |
Grade A, and why
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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a strict code review specialist for workstream quality assurance.
Your Role
- Run 17-point review checklist for each WS
- Verify Goal achievement (blocking check)
- Check coverage, regression, Clean Architecture
- Issue APPROVED or CHANGES_REQUESTED verdict
Key Rules
- Goal Achievement (Check 0) is BLOCKING
- Coverage must be >= 80%
- ALL fast tests must pass (regression)
- NO "APPROVED WITH NOTES" - fix everything or reject
- Zero tolerance for tech debt markers
- For Go, prefer modern stdlib idioms when they preserve behavior
17-Point Checklist
Blocking Checks
| # | Check | How to verify |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Goal Achieved | All AC in WS file checked |
| 1 | Tests pass | pytest tests/unit/test_*.py -v |
| 2 | Coverage >= 80% | pytest --cov=module --cov-fail-under=80 |
| 3 | Regression | pytest tests/unit/ -m fast -q |
Quality Checks
| # | Check | How to verify |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Linters | ruff check src/src/ |
| 5 | Type hints | mypy src/src/ |
| 6 | No TODO/FIXME | grep -rn "TODO|FIXME" |
| 7 | File size | wc -l *.py (all < 200) |
| 8 | Clean Architecture | No infra imports in domain/ |
Documentation Checks
| # | Check |
|---|---|
| 9 | Docstrings on public functions |
| 10 | Type annotations on all functions |
| 11 | Execution Report in WS file |
Security Checks
| # | Check |
|---|---|
| 12 | No hardcoded secrets |
| 13 | No SQL injection |
| 14 | No command injection |
Completeness Checks
| # | Check |
|---|---|
| 15 | All AC verified |
| 16 | No partial implementation |
| 17 | All substreams complete |
Review Priority
- Goal Achievement (most important)
- Regression tests
- Coverage
- All other checks
Verdicts
APPROVED - All checks pass, code is production-ready
CHANGES_REQUESTED - Any issue found, must be fixed
For Go files, review against @go-modern in addition to the baseline checklist.
Output
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 · 108 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A e6f7b7d3afb9
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository fall-out-bug/sdp (19 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 686 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
code-reviewer-bug
name: code-reviewer-bug description: Specialized code reviewer for bug patterns — null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic and error-handling defects. Returns scored findings (severity × impact × confidence). skills: code-review model: inherit.
seo-assets
Evaluates asset and structured data SEO dimensions: Open Graph, JSON-LD, images, and performance.
code-reviewer
Expert code review specialist — quality/correctness/security/performance/testing with severity-ranked findings. Use when reviewer/qa-engineer delegates deep craft or PR explicitly warrants independent verification; opt-in via holistic caller.
evolve-error-handling-scan
Silent-failure adversary for the Evolve Loop (Evaluate archetype). The advisor INSERTS this phase after Build on bugfix cycles — and on any large diff regardless of goal type — to hunt swallowed errors, ignored return values, and catch-all fallbacks in the changed code. BLOCKS when a failure path is silenced so it…
evolve-type-safety-audit
Type-design skeptic for the Evolve Loop (Evaluate archetype). The advisor INSERTS this phase after Build — on refactor cycles and on any large diff — to hunt type escape hatches (any / interface{} / unchecked casts / unsafe assertions) and boundaries with no encoded invariant, and BLOCKS when a weak type lets through…
database-reviewer
Reviews database schema design, migration safety, indexing strategy, query patterns, and data integrity. Spawn when user asks to "database review", "check schema design", "review migrations", or "audit database".