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/fazxes/Claude-codeWrote 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/fazxes/claude-code/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fazxes/claude-code/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fazxes/claude-code/code-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/fazxes/claude-code/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fazxes/claude-code/code-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 | $0.00039 | $0.00580 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00232 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00116 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00058 |
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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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 · 47 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A a7df173bf77a
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository fazxes/Claude-code (245 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 580 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
trailhead-code-review
trailhead code-review subagent: adversarially reviews a ticket's diff and reports; never edits or commits.
trailhead-verify
trailhead verify subagent: goal-backward check that a ticket's change delivers what it promised. Read-only, never edits or commits.
codex-reviewer
OPTIONAL independent code-quality reviewer. Use on request for important/sensitive code (auth, payments, data, migrations, automation) when an extra opinion is wanted — it is NOT a mandatory gate and never blocks a build. PRIMARY path = the official Codex plugin (/codex:review, /codex:adversarial-review). Runs on the…
review-boss
Use PROACTIVELY as the final QA gate before any Forge task is reported done — reviews the finished work against the user's actual goal (design, code quality, logic, security, tests, UX, edge cases, missing features) and files a structured failure report on any real gap.
code-reviewer
Adversarial Reviewer — independent reviewer for the conditional pre-Build plan attack (named escalation trigger required) and for REVIEW-ONLY mode. Re-reads request/docs and tries to disprove the plan or diff. Never edits src; never writes or weakens tests.
spec-fidelity-auditor
Conformance of a change to its own spec: a bidirectional requirements trace, every criterion delivered with evidence, every diff hunk traced to a clause or dispositioned.