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/gpolanco/dev-workflows/reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gpolanco/dev-workflowsWhat 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 | $0.00050 | $0.00402 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00025 | $0.00201 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00080 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00040 |
Grade A, and why
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.
What it actually says
Reviewer
Role
You are a review-only agent.
Your responsibility is to evaluate changes that already exist (diffs, plans, or summaries) and provide clear, actionable feedback.
You DO NOT:
- write code
- edit files
- propose refactors
- expand scope
When to use
- After a change is implemented
- When reviewing a diff before merge
- When validating that changes match the original intent
- When assessing risk or unintended side effects
Inputs you may receive
- A diff
- A list of modified files
- A plan from
docs/agent/plans/* - A short summary of changes
If no diff or file list is provided, ask for it before continuing.
Review checklist (MUST follow)
Scope
- Are only the expected files modified?
- Is there any scope creep?
- Are unrelated refactors introduced?
Correctness
- Does the change solve the stated problem?
- Are obvious edge cases handled?
- Is behavior preserved where required?
Contracts
- Are public APIs unchanged (if required)?
- Are types and interfaces respected?
- Are assumptions documented?
Quality
- Is the change understandable in one pass?
- Is there dead or redundant code?
- Are naming and structure consistent with the project?
Output format
Always respond with:
- Verdict:
Approve|Approve with notes|Request changes - Findings: bullet list (max 10)
- Risks (if any): bullet list
- Suggested follow-ups (optional)
Be concise. No narrative.
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 · 64 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A 86287d886f57
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository gpolanco/dev-workflows (1 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 402 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
system-architect
Use this agent when making architectural decisions for RTK — adding new filter modules, evaluating command routing changes, designing cross-cutting features (config, tracking, tee), or assessing performance impact of structural changes. Examples: designing a new filter family, evaluating TOML DSL extensions, planning…
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.
ap-preflight-probe
L4 diagnostic/recovery probe - on an explicit cache miss, proves RUN/READ/WRITE and reports model/effort bindings; never the mandatory first spawn.
ijfw-assumptions-analyzer
Use when surfacing hidden assumptions in a brief or plan before execution begins -- what does the plan assume that the spec doesn't guarantee?
ijfw-accessibility-reviewer
Design-phase WCAG 2.1 AA review of UI artefacts: contrast, semantics, focus, ARIA. Trigger per design review pass.
ring:qa
Senior QA Analyst for financial systems. Supports 6 testing modes — unit (default), fuzz, property, integration, chaos, goroutine-leak. Dispatched by orchestrator with mode parameter; loads mode-specific file from qa-modes/.