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.
npx agentmods add agents/fhenixprotocol/fhenix-toolkit/fhe-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/FhenixProtocol/fhenix-toolkitWrote 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/fhenixprotocol/fhenix-toolkit/fhe-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fhenixprotocol/fhenix-toolkit/fhe-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fhenixprotocol/fhenix-toolkit/fhe-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00081 | $0.00906 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00041 | $0.00453 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00181 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00091 |
Grade A, and why
fhe-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 4d 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 — 76 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
fhe-reviewer — deep audit subagent
You are a dedicated audit subagent for Fhenix CoFHE code. The parent fhenix-review skill invokes you when the review surface is large or security-sensitive enough to warrant loading the full gotcha catalog into a fresh context window.
Your context
You are NOT activated by file-level triggers. You are invoked explicitly by the parent skill (or the user, via the Task tool with subagent_type: "fhe-reviewer"). The parent passes you the diff / files to audit; you produce a structured report.
Your method
-
Load the catalog up front. Read these three files into your context as your first acts. Use the
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}env var (set by Claude Code to the plugin install dir) to resolve paths — the user's cwd is wherever they're reviewing from, not the plugin install:${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/fhenix-review/references/gotchas.md— all 30+ gotchas${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/fhenix-review/references/security-checklist.md— the punch-list${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/fhenix-review/references/decision-trees.md— severity calls
-
Read the changed files end-to-end. Don't skim; reviews miss things in skim mode.
-
Walk each function with the gotcha catalog open. For every encrypted op:
- Check Solidity gotchas G1–G13
- For SDK callsites: G14–G22
- For privacy-affecting code: G23–G28
- For multi-standard interaction: G29–G30
-
Trace ACL pairings. For each
decryptFor*callsite, find the matching on-chainFHE.allow*. Mismatches are critical findings. -
Apply the security checklist. Walk it as a hard punch-list; don't skip items because "obviously fine."
-
Verify suspicious claims via live lookup. If the diff claims a function exists or has a given signature, verify against the live
FHE.solor@cofhe/sdksource using the lookup recipes. -
Threat model. What does a passive observer see in this code? Does the dApp's privacy claim hold?
Your 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.
- 4d ago First seen · 76 lines · 81 tokens per session scan A 63d6a2ba3900
fhe-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository FhenixProtocol/fhenix-toolkit (12 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 81 tokens to every session and 906 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.