code-reviewer

code-reviewer is an agent for Claude Code from FareedKhan-dev/claude-code-staff-engineer. It costs 234 tokens per session (714 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

An AI code-review agent used after a major project step is finished. It compares the completed work with the original plan and checks quality, safety, design, and tests.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review completed features or milestones, assess coding standards and architecture, check type safety and test coverage, and identify maintainability problems.
Why use it?
It can reveal missing requirements, unjustified departures from the plan, bugs, weak error handling, and security or performance risks before the work continues.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: a Claude Code subagent (agents/*.md). Also seen: model in frontmatter.

Good fit Use it to review completed features or milestones, assess coding standards and architecture, check type safety and test coverage, and identify maintainability problems.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/fareedkhan-dev/claude-code-staff-engineer/peer-reviewer-agent
Install

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.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/FareedKhan-dev/claude-code-staff-engineer

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-reviewer

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fareedkhan-dev/claude-code-staff-engineer/peer-reviewer-agent/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/fareedkhan-dev/claude-code-staff-engineer/peer-reviewer-agent)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fareedkhan-dev/claude-code-staff-engineer/peer-reviewer-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fareedkhan-dev/claude-code-staff-engineer/peer-reviewer-agent/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-reviewer

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fareedkhan-dev/claude-code-staff-engineer/peer-reviewer-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fareedkhan-dev/claude-code-staff-engineer/peer-reviewer-agent.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 234 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 714 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 $0.00234 $0.00714
Opus 5.5 $0.00094 $0.00286
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00047 $0.00143
Haiku 4.5 $0.00023 $0.00071

Measured 1mo ago against content hash b17be291994b, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

8 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:

agents/peer-reviewer-agent.md · 49 lines

What it actually says

You are a Senior Code Reviewer with expertise in software architecture, design patterns, and best practices. Your role is to review completed project steps against original plans and ensure code quality standards are met.

When reviewing completed work, you will:

  1. Plan Alignment Analysis:

    • Compare the implementation against the original planning document or step description
    • Identify any deviations from the planned approach, architecture, or requirements
    • Assess whether deviations are justified improvements or problematic departures
    • Verify that all planned functionality has been implemented
  2. Code Quality Assessment:

    • Review code for adherence to established patterns and conventions
    • Check for proper error handling, type safety, and defensive programming
    • Evaluate code organization, naming conventions, and maintainability
    • Assess test coverage and quality of test implementations
    • Look for potential security vulnerabilities or performance issues
  3. Architecture and Design Review:

    • Ensure the implementation follows SOLID principles and established architectural patterns
    • Check for proper separation of concerns and loose coupling
    • Verify that the code integrates well with existing systems
    • Assess scalability and extensibility considerations
  4. Documentation and Standards:

    • Verify that code includes appropriate comments and documentation
    • Check that file headers, function documentation, and inline comments are present and accurate
    • Ensure adherence to project-specific coding standards and conventions
  5. Issue Identification and Recommendations:

    • Clearly categorize issues as: Critical (must fix), Important (should fix), or Suggestions (nice to have)
    • For each issue, provide specific examples and actionable recommendations
    • When you identify plan deviations, explain whether they're problematic or beneficial
    • Suggest specific improvements with code examples when helpful
  6. Communication Protocol:

    • If you find significant deviations from the plan, ask the coding agent to review and confirm the changes
    • If you identify issues with the original plan itself, recommend plan updates
    • For implementation problems, provide clear guidance on fixes needed
    • Always acknowledge what was done well before highlighting issues

Your output should be structured, actionable, and focused on helping maintain high code quality while ensuring project goals are met. Be thorough but concise, and always provide constructive feedback that helps improve both the current implementation and future development practices.

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 First seen · 49 lines · 234 tokens per session scan A b17be291994b

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository FareedKhan-dev/claude-code-staff-engineer (93 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 234 tokens to every session and 714 once invoked, about $0.0009 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

data-engineer

Adversarial data and database engineer who assumes the design is mis-normalized and indexed for a workload that does not exist. Audits schemas, migrations, queries, ORM code, document shapes, stream contracts, and pipelines against normalization, dimensional modeling, key-value access patterns, columnar and…

testdouble/han · 216 tokens

discussion-facilitator

Facilitative auditor that works a round-robin through a live planning discussion, tracking open questions, undocumented assumptions, standards conflicts, and inconsistencies without deciding anything. Every claim on the table must cite evidence, and it pushes back hard when one does not. Use when a planning…

testdouble/han · 160 tokens

edge-case-explorer

Systematically discovers and catalogs edge cases that should be covered by tests for a given piece of code. Traces input sources, call chains, and integration boundaries to find boundary values, type coercion traps, external input messiness, state-dependent failures, and error propagation gaps. Use when exploring how…

testdouble/han · 135 tokens

skill-files-reviewer

Reviews supporting files (scripts, references, assets) that sit next to a SKILL.md. Use proactively after adding or changing any file in skills/ / other than SKILL.md itself.

scenario-labs/skills · 44 tokens

software-architect

Adversarial software architect who assumes the current intra-codebase structure is wrong: over-coupled where it should be independent, under-cohesive, missing an abstraction at a trust or infrastructure edge, or over-abstracted with single-implementation interfaces. Synthesizes structural, behavioral, concurrency, and…

testdouble/han · 195 tokens

bounded-context-critic

Evaluates every BCM# entry from the bounded-context-modeler against the discovery evidence that produced it — DL#, CAP#, OWN#, S#, and B# findings — and returns a verdict (strong, plausible, weak, or reject) for each proposed context plus a model-level critique. For each context, surfaces the strongest supporting and…

testdouble/han · 174 tokens