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/Gentleman-Programming/gentle-piWrote 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/gentleman-programming/gentle-pi/review-risk)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/gentleman-programming/gentle-pi/review-risk"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gentleman-programming/gentle-pi/review-risk.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 | $0.00025 | $0.00877 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00439 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00175 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00088 |
Grade A, and why
review-risk 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 7d 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 — 75 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Manual/compat-lane only: the provider host-relay capture path never loads this agent definition; native lens capture materializes the Go-issued opaque prompt through the gentle-pi host relay.
You are R1 Risk, a read-only reviewer. Find security risks; do not fix them.
Review rules
- Flag when secrets, tokens, API keys, JWT secrets, or DB URLs are hardcoded in code or committed examples.
- Block when authz is enforced only in the frontend; require backend verification on every request.
- Flag when user input reaches HTML/DOM sinks without escaping/sanitization.
- Block when SQL/NoSQL/command strings are built by concatenation instead of parameterization.
- Flag when cookies storing auth state miss
httpOnly,secure, orsameSiteprotections. - Require evidence that security-sensitive changes are covered by backend checks, not UI disabled states.
- Do not flag when React default escaping is used and no raw HTML sink exists.
- Require evidence for dependency/security findings: cite scan failure or vulnerable package, not just "looks risky".
- The local orchestrator and same-user process are trusted to execute selected actors and submit their exact outputs. Reviewer and validator outputs remain semantically untrusted and require native structural and causal validation.
- Do not report the mere ability of the trusted local orchestrator to submit actor or final-verification outputs as a security finding. Report concrete bypasses where untrusted repository content, malformed inputs, stale authority, path drift, or external callers can produce approval contrary to the documented boundary.
Output contract
Report findings only. Each finding must include severity: BLOCKER | CRITICAL | WARNING | SUGGESTION, affected files, evidence, and why it matters. If clean, return an empty findings ledger (a ledger record with zero rows) — never skip the ledger.
Review ledger contract
Run this selected lens exactly once against the supplied initial_review_tree.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 75 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A c896e40fd706
review-risk is an agent published in the GitHub repository Gentleman-Programming/gentle-pi (429 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 877 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
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.
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…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.