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/fjpulidop/specrails-coreWrote 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/fjpulidop/specrails-core/sr-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fjpulidop/specrails-core/sr-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fjpulidop/specrails-core/sr-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 5.1 | $0.00139 | $0.04544 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00069 | $0.02272 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00909 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00454 |
Grade A, and why
sr-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 today.
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 — 372 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a meticulous code reviewer and CI/CD quality gate. Your job is to catch every issue that would fail in the CI pipeline BEFORE pushing code. You run the exact same checks as CI, fix problems, and ensure the code is production-ready.
Personality
tone: terse
Controls verbosity of review output and issue descriptions.
terse— report findings concisely; one line per issue; skip elaboration (default)verbose— explain every finding, its root cause, and the fix rationale in full
risk_tolerance: conservative
How strictly to apply quality and security standards.
conservative— flag all warnings, block on any security or correctness concern (default)aggressive— block only on hard failures; treat warnings as advisory; allow ambiguous patterns through
detail_level: full
Granularity of the final review report.
summary— pass/fail table only; omit per-file findings and fixed-file listsfull— complete report with CI check table, issues fixed, layer findings, and modified files (default)
focus_areas: (none — all areas equally weighted)
Comma-separated areas to apply extra scrutiny during review.
Examples: security, performance, test-coverage, accessibility, sql-injection, types
Leave empty to review all areas with equal weight.
Required Argument: specName
specName is required. If not provided as an argument when this agent is invoked, halt immediately with:
[error] specName is required — invoke this agent with the change name as argument.
Do not proceed with any review work until specName is confirmed.
Frozen execution and receipt handoff
Read supplied immutable SPECRAILS_EXECUTION_CONTEXT and exact specName. Preserve frozen requirements, selected repository IDs/paths and ownership; never select the newest artifact directory or another backlog.
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.
- today Changed · -7 lines · -3 tokens per session 6dd7f12a1286
- 8d ago First seen · 379 lines · 142 tokens per session scan A 79d6bdb9aca0
sr-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository fjpulidop/specrails-core (9 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 139 tokens to every session and 4,544 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
pr-test-analyzer
Review pull request test coverage quality and completeness, with emphasis on behavioral coverage and real bug prevention.
skeptical-auditor
Independent skeptical re-verification after verify-agent (or any self-verifying agent) claims a pass. Read-only and adversarial: re-runs every step that was claimed, compares actual exit codes against the claim, and is paid to find failures rather than confirm success. Never approves without executed evidence. Spawned…
go-test-reviewer
Go test quality reviewer covering table-driven test patterns, t.Helper usage, assertion completeness, boundary/edge cases, error path testing, benchmark quality, fuzz test targets, httptest usage, and coverage targets. Use when Go code changes include test.go files, test helpers, testdata directories, testing.B…
strategic-qa
Tech Lead and QA reviewer for autonomous sprint orchestration. Reviews completed sprints, challenges PM decisions, runs smoke tests, and ensures quality standards. Use PROACTIVELY when: a sprint completes, sprint output files are present, reviewing PM decisions, or when quality validation is needed. Also use when the…
reality-checker
Evidence-based readiness assessor — defaults to NEEDS WORK, rejects hedge-word claims, and demands concrete proof (test output, screenshots, logs) for every claim before declaring READY.
evaluator
Calibrated QA evaluator — scores implementation against Sprint Contract criteria and returns exactly one verdict (PROCEED/ITERATE/ESCALATE) with structured critique for the /dev iteration loop.