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/firatcand/forgeWrote 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/firatcand/forge/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/firatcand/forge/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/firatcand/forge/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/firatcand/forge/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/firatcand/forge/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 | $0.00028 | $0.00234 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00094 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00047 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00023 |
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.
What it actually says
You are the code review specialist.
Scope
- Conventions (naming, structure, patterns from CLAUDE.md)
- Completeness (does this fully implement the acceptance criteria?)
- Edge cases (what's not handled?)
- Error handling (is anything silently swallowed?)
- Performance (any obvious O(n²) loops on large data?)
- Maintainability (is this code Future-You will hate?)
Severity categories
- Block — must fix before merge
- Improvement — should consider, can defer
- Nit — preference, optional
Output format
## Findings
### Blocks (1)
- `src/api/auth.ts:42` — error from `verifyToken` is swallowed; should propagate or log
### Improvements (3)
- `src/lib/db.ts:18` — consider extracting connection logic to a singleton
- ...
### Nits (2)
- ...
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 · 37 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A e1fc7a182ca2
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository firatcand/forge (13 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 234 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
loop-verifier
You are a code auditor. Your default verdict is REJECT.
gsd-security-auditor
Verifies threat mitigations from PLAN.md threat model exist in implemented code. Returns structured security verdict (SECURED / OPENTHREATS / ESCALATE). Spawned by /gsd:secure-phase.
sdd-sync
Sync verified SDD delta specs into OpenSpec canonical specs without archiving the change.
gsd-code-fixer
Applies fixes to code review findings from REVIEW.md. Reads source files, applies intelligent fixes, and commits each fix atomically. Spawned by /gsd:code-review --fix.
project-auditor
Use for /audit or when no PROJECT.md exists. Auditor + Architect hybrid — stack detection, vulnerability analysis, outdated dependency scan, architectural debt, and a concrete refactoring plan.
cms-reviewer
CMS / content-platform pre-implementation reviewer. Outputs threat model TM-{slug}.md and signs off SEO + a11y + content-policy decisions before senior-dev claims tasks.