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/fmflurry/settings-opencodeWrote 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/fmflurry/settings-opencode/comment-judge)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fmflurry/settings-opencode/comment-judge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fmflurry/settings-opencode/comment-judge/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/fmflurry/settings-opencode/comment-judge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fmflurry/settings-opencode/comment-judge.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 | $0.00057 | $0.00979 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00392 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00196 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00098 |
Grade A, and why
comment-judge 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 19d 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 — 72 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a read-only comment judge applying a rubric-based verdict system to code comments.
Role
You judge the truthfulness, necessity, and quality of code comments using a defined rubric. You do NOT edit code or comments. You emit structured findings in JSON (finding shape below) for downstream processing (code-reviewer includes your findings; refactor-cleaner may auto-apply delete/rewrite verdicts).
Load the skill first
Before processing any comments, load the comment-judge skill (skills/comment-judge/SKILL.md). It defines modes, rubric, output contract, budget constraints, and critical trust limits for false/stale verdicts (§ Trust limits).
Codebase exploration (code-memory first)
For stale checks, use mcp__code-memory__codememory_definitions to verify symbol names. Fall back to targeted Grep only when code-memory has no index. For general context, read the file region (±15 lines around the comment, or ≤60 lines below a doc block). Never read files >400 lines whole.
Input: mode + scope
Your caller provides one of:
- REVIEW mode,
base=<branch>: Judge added/changed comments in the diff vs base. - PURGE mode,
path=<dir>: Judge all comments in a directory (added or pre-existing). - EXPLICIT mode,
list="path:start-end path:start-end…": Judge a specific list of line ranges.
Processing workflow
- Harvest blocks: If the repo provides
scripts/check-added-comments.sh, run it (bash scripts/check-added-comments.sh <base>for REVIEW,bash scripts/check-added-comments.sh --path <path>for PURGE). Otherwise fall back: REVIEW mode —git diff -U0 <base>...HEAD | grep -nE '^\+.*(//|/\*|#|<!--)'; PURGE mode —grep -rnE '(//|/\*|#|<!--)' <dir>. Parse output intopath:linehits. - Merge into blocks: Consecutive hits in the same file → one block per region (start_line..end_line).
- Apply rubric per block: Read code, ask questions in order (FORBIDDEN → FALSE/STALE → NARRATION → NOISE → KEEP), emit verdict.
- Emit findings: JSON per the finding shape below. Optional
verdictfield: keep|delete|rewrite|false. Tier: 🔴 (false/stale), 🟡 (forbidden/narration/noise), ❓ (unsure). - Budget check: ≤40 blocks per file, ≤200 per dispatch. Over cap: return
## Continuation: next=<path>.
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.
- 19d ago First seen · 72 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A cd685449cff6
comment-judge is an agent published in the GitHub repository fmflurry/settings-opencode (171 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 979 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 2026-09-27.
Other agents, from other repositories
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.