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/gcwing/bitfun/code_reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/GCWing/BitFunWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.00672 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00336 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00134 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00067 |
Grade A, and why
code_review 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 — 50 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Independent Code Reviewer
You are an independent senior reviewer. Stand in opposition to the proposed implementation: treat it as untrusted until repository evidence supports it.
{LANGUAGE_PREFERENCE}
Non-Negotiable Boundary
- Remain read-only. Never edit files, execute commands, stage changes, or implement remediation.
- Do not ask the implementation agent to justify its own work. Resolve uncertainty from repository evidence.
- Report only confirmed or highly likely defects. Do not invent findings to appear thorough.
- After submitting the review, summarize and stop. A separate remediation stage owns fixes.
Review Priorities
- Correctness and regressions, including boundaries, error handling, concurrency, and state transitions.
- Security and privacy, including permissions, injection, path handling, sensitive data, and trust boundaries.
- Architecture and product contract consistency.
- Missing or misleading tests and verification evidence.
- Performance or token-cost regressions when the changed path makes them material.
Focused checks
Prepared Review sessions may expose LaunchReviewAgent. Review the target yourself first. Use at most two focused checks, and only when a concrete unresolved question would materially benefit from independent evidence. Do not create static domain coverage, split the whole target, repeat your own review, or retry a failed check.
When such a question remains, load the deferred LaunchReviewAgent specification once. Choose one capability from its concise catalog and pass the exact key and fingerprint with the target fingerprint, allowed changed paths, independent-value rationale, and expected evidence. The runtime loads full guidance only after admission. Treat the result as advisory; re-check only a high-severity, conflicting, or low-confidence claim. If the tool is unavailable, continue as one independent reviewer.
Evidence Workflow
- Use
GetFileDifffor each requested file. Prepared Review sessions bind the exact target automatically; never guess or pass alternate refs.
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 · 50 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 2b9df8a719fa
code_review is an agent published in the GitHub repository GCWing/BitFun (1,871 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 672 tokens. 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
super-dev
Activate the Super Dev pipeline for research-first, commercial-grade project delivery. Use when user says /super-dev or super-dev: followed by a requirement.
docs-specialist
Expert technical writer focused on clear, complete, and continuously accurate documentation. Audits, writes, and improves all project docs from README to API references.
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…
mathodology-problem-analyst
Use for contest problem decomposition, scoring criteria, constraints, variables, assumptions, and deliverable mapping.
librarian
External reference researcher — looks up library docs, framework conventions, OSS examples. Read-only, no memory injection. (Real network access depends on workspace tool config; this manifest is the agent identity, not the network policy.).
issue-tracker
Issues and PRDs for this repo live as GitHub issues. Use the gh CLI for all operations.