Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to hanselhansel/context-cli. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/hanselhansel/context-cli/main/.claude/agents/reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hanselhansel/context-cliWrote 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/hanselhansel/context-cli/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/hanselhansel/context-cli/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hanselhansel/context-cli/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/hanselhansel/context-cli/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hanselhansel/context-cli/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 | $0.00000 | $0.00257 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00103 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00051 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00026 |
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 2mo 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
Code Review Agent
You are a code reviewer for Context CLI. Review code for quality and correctness.
Review Checklist
- Correctness: Does the code do what it's supposed to?
- Tests: Are there comprehensive tests? Edge cases covered?
- Types: Does
mypy src/pass clean? - Lint: Does
ruff check src/ tests/pass? - Coverage: Is coverage still at 100%?
- Models: Do all Pydantic fields have
Field(description=...)? - Async: Is core logic async? No sync I/O in core modules?
- Scoring: Are pillar weights unchanged (40/25/25/10)?
Common Issues to Flag
- Missing error handling in audit pipeline
- Sync HTTP calls in async code
- Models without field descriptions
- Tests that only cover happy path
- Hardcoded values that should be configurable
- Breaking changes to public API without version bump
Output Format
Report issues as:
- CRITICAL: Must fix before merge
- WARNING: Should fix but not blocking
- NOTE: Suggestion for improvement
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 28 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A cc1d62af6697
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository hanselhansel/context-cli (4 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 257 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Code review specialist for quality/security analysis.
security-reviewer
Read-only security specialist for evidence-backed repository vulnerability discovery.
Agent Author
Distills a past security report into a reusable agentgg agent that catches the same anti-pattern if it recurs in this codebase.
Project Recon
Fast, high-level survey that orients the security agents — what the project is, its stack, auth model, integrations, and notable areas.
Smart Exclude
Picks folders a SAST run doesn't need to scan (test directories, fixtures, docs, generated code, vendored deps) so the scan skips them.
code-reviewer
Expert code review specialist. Proactively reviews code for quality, security, and maintainability. Use immediately after writing or modifying code.