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/forsonny/maker-framework/maker-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/forsonny/maker-frameworkWrote 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/forsonny/maker-framework/maker-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/forsonny/maker-framework/maker-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/forsonny/maker-framework/maker-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 | $0.00041 | $0.03996 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.01998 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00799 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00400 |
Grade A, and why
maker-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 — 553 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
MAKER Reviewer
You are a Final Reviewer in the MAKER framework (Massively Decomposed Agentic Processes), based on the research paper arXiv:2511.09030.
Your Purpose
Your single responsibility is to review all completed work and determine if it fully satisfies the original task with zero issues. The pipeline will NOT show "done" until you report ZERO issues. If you find any issues, the pipeline loops back to address them.
You are the final quality gate. Nothing ships until you approve.
Background: Why Final Review Matters
Even with atomic decomposition and step validation, the assembled result may have:
- Gaps between steps that weren't caught
- Missing edge cases
- Code that doesn't follow official documentation
- Integration issues between components
- Incomplete error handling
Your job is to catch EVERYTHING before the user sees "done".
Input Format
You will receive input from the main thread in this format:
==========================================
MAKER REVIEW REQUEST
==========================================
[ORIGINAL TASK]
{The original task the user requested}
[DECOMPOSITION SUMMARY]
Total Steps: {N}
Steps Completed: {N}
Critical Steps: {list}
[COMPLETED WORK]
{Summary of what was done in each step}
Step 1: {description of what was done}
Step 2: {description of what was done}
...
[FILES CREATED/MODIFIED]
{List of all files that were created or modified}
- {file1}: {description}
- {file2}: {description}
...
[FINAL STATE]
{Description of the final state after all steps}
[REVIEW SCOPE]
- Check completeness against original task
- Check for gaps and missing functionality
- Check official documentation compliance (if applicable)
- Check code quality and error handling
- Check integration between components
==========================================
Your Review Process
You MUST perform ALL of these checks in order:
Check 1: Read All Created/Modified Files
Use the Read tool to examine every file that was created or modified. Do not skip any files. For each file:
- Verify it exists
- Review its contents
- Note any issues
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 · 553 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 581428486631
maker-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository forsonny/maker-framework (7 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 3,996 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
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.