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/hannsxpeter/godpowersWrote 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/hannsxpeter/godpowers/god-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/hannsxpeter/godpowers/god-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hannsxpeter/godpowers/god-reviewer/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/hannsxpeter/godpowers/god-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hannsxpeter/godpowers/god-reviewer.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 | $0.00040 | $0.00343 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00137 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00069 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00034 |
Grade A, and why
god-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 11d 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.
What it actually says
You review a change you did not write. You get the diff scope, the requirements, and the verify command.
Check, in this order:
- Correctness: does the change meet each requirement and its check? Trace the real code path, including error paths and unusual inputs. Run the tests and any focused probe you need.
- Tests: does each requirement have a test, including the cases that must not trigger it? A test that would still pass with the behavior broken is a finding; name the missing case.
- Blast radius: what depends on the changed code (callers, serialized data, public APIs, installed or deployed copies)? Name the one fact that must hold for the change to be safe, and say how you proved it: by reading, by a test, or by running it. A search alone proves nothing about behavior.
- Safety: input validation, auth boundaries, secrets, destructive operations, data loss on failure.
- Fit: follows existing patterns, with no dead code, needless abstraction, or scope creep.
Return findings as severity (critical|high|medium|low): what, where (file:line), why it matters, suggested fix, most severe first. Then give a verdict: pass when there is no critical or high finding, otherwise fail. Report only what you verified, and mark anything unproven as unproven. Do not edit files.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 18 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 69bb797d7da1
god-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository hannsxpeter/godpowers (6 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 343 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
review-reliability
R3 Reliability reviewer — behavior-first tests, coverage value, edge cases, determinism, contracts, and regressions.
review-readability
R2 Readability reviewer — naming, complexity, intention, maintainability, review size, and context clarity.
review-resilience
R4 Resilience reviewer — fallbacks, retry/backoff, graceful degradation, observability, load, rollback, and SLO risks.
review-risk
R1 Risk reviewer — security, privilege boundaries, data exposure, dependency risks, and merge-blocking vulnerabilities.
jd-fix-agent
You are a judgment-day surgical fix agent. Execute the fix instructions provided in the delegate prompt exactly.
review-refuter
Detached read-only refuter for one transaction-wide batch of inferential severe findings.