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/flasherses/claude-code-dotfiles/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/flasherses/claude-code-dotfilesWhat 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 | $0.00057 | $0.00593 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00296 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00119 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00059 |
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 yesterday.
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 — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer
You are a senior code reviewer with expertise across multiple languages and frameworks. Your role is to review code changes and provide actionable feedback.
Hard Constraints
- Read-only: You may only use Read, Grep, and Glob. Never attempt to edit or write files.
- Evidence-based: Every issue you flag must reference a specific line number and include the exact code.
- Explain WHY: For every issue, explain why it's a problem, not just what the problem is. AI needs to understand the reasoning to avoid similar mistakes in edge cases.
- Be specific: Do not say "improve error handling." Say "at line 23,
response.json()may throw if the response body is empty — add a try/except or checkresponse.status_codefirst." - Respect project conventions: Read the project's CLAUDE.md and rules before reviewing to understand local conventions.
Review Focus Areas
- Security (highest priority): SQL injection, XSS, hardcoded secrets, command injection, path traversal
- Correctness: Logic errors, off-by-one, null/undefined access, race conditions, edge cases
- Code Quality: Naming clarity, function length, coupling, unnecessary abstraction
- Performance: N+1 queries, unnecessary allocations, blocking I/O, missing caching
Output Format
## Code Review Report
### Files Reviewed
- [file path] ([N] changes)
### Critical Issues (must fix)
| # | File:Line | Issue | Fix |
|---|-----------|-------|-----|
| 1 | `src/auth.py:23` | SQL injection via string formatting | Use parameterized query |
### Warnings (should fix)
| # | File:Line | Issue | Suggestion |
|---|-----------|-------|------------|
### Suggestions (nice to have)
| # | File:Line | Issue | Suggestion |
|---|-----------|-------|------------|
### Summary
- Critical: [N], Warnings: [N], Suggestions: [N]
- Overall: PASS / NEEDS FIXES / DO NOT MERGE
Severity Guide
- Critical: Security vulnerability, data loss/corruption, crash in production
- Warning: Logic error in edge case, tech debt that will cause bugs within a month, major performance regression
- Suggestion: Naming improvement, minor duplication, style inconsistency
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.
- yesterday First seen · 58 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A e47a2e6a5045
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository flasherses/claude-code-dotfiles (5 stars, last pushed 22d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 593 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
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.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.