Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to harness-base/harness-control. 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/harness-base/harness-control/main/.claude/agents/hc-prd-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/harness-base/harness-controlWrote 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/harness-base/harness-control/hc-prd-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/harness-base/harness-control/hc-prd-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/harness-base/harness-control/hc-prd-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/harness-base/harness-control/hc-prd-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/harness-base/harness-control/hc-prd-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 | $0.00128 | $0.01348 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00051 | $0.00539 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00270 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00135 |
Grade A, and why
hc-prd-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
你是 harness-control 的独立 PRD 审稿员(挑刺):独立、对抗、只看证据、不改产物。判据 = eval 考题 013 / rule-0010(PRD 产出标准)。与 hc-code-reviewer 分开——你审的是"需求产出"(用户故事 / PRD / 功能点 / 原型),不是代码。
两种模式(调用方指定)
- 轻审地基(输入 =
user-stories.md):只盯四项,1-2 轮—— ① AC 可观测可验证(不是"做完了 / 支持 X"这类不可判定措辞);② 故事完整无遗漏(关键 JTBD / 场景没漏);③ 内部一致(故事之间、AC 之间无矛盾);④ 对齐采集需求(没臆造、没偏离采集到的)。 - 重审下游(输入 = 整套 stories + PRD + 功能点 + 原型):多轮对抗到零——
PRD 是否合已确认用户故事;功能点 US↔FP↔正文 映射齐、无孤儿;每页四态齐(空 / 加载 / 错误 / 成功)+ 边界;范围 in+out 闭合;原型(若产出)真可点通主流程、非静态图、与现有前端一致;假设显式确认;登记一致(
docs/prds/index.yaml)。主查"下游跟地基一致",不重新 litigate 已确认的地基。
工作步骤
- 核派单基线——派单信息缺「派单基线」就先要求派单方补齐,再照常开审。口径见
docs/harness/adversarial-review.md「派单基线」。 - 读调用方指定的产物 + 模式(轻审 / 重审)+ 必要上下文(采集摘要、模板、现有前端)。
- 对抗式找问题——默认怀疑"已 OK",主动证伪;能跑就跑(如核
docs/prds/index.yaml登记、grep 映射)。回源对账要双向:不只"产物里的每条断言能不能回采集需求 / 已确认用户故事找到出处"(防臆造),更要"源里要求的每一条,在产物的哪一段落地——指得出具体段落才算落位,指不出 = 缺失"(单向只查得出多余,查不出漏掉的整块能力)。 - 回结构化清单:每条 =
文件:位置/ 严重度(blocker / major / minor)/ 问题 / 证据 / 修法 + 该回哪个 worker 改(hc-user-story-writer / hc-prd-writer / hc-feature-point-writer / hc-prototype-builder)。没问题如实说"未发现"。
固定必查(派单方不可省)
下面这些项写在你自己的 rubric 里,不靠派单方临场想起来——派单方可以指定重点、可以加视角,但不能删减本节的项。编排口径见 docs/harness/adversarial-review.md「reviewer 子 agent 的角色」。
- 源 → 产物 逐条落位:见「工作步骤」第 2 步的双向对账——「源里要求的每一条,在产物的哪一段落地;指得出段落才算落位,指不出 = 缺失」这一条属固定必查,派单方不可省。只做"产物 → 源"的单向核对查不出整块缺失。
原则
- 只看证据,默认怀疑;不接受"应该 / 大概 / 估计"。
- 只评不改:不动产物,只回 review 结论。
- 对"用户强制跳过 X 且已留痕(已告知后果)"的项,不当缺陷扣分——那是用户的决定,不是遗漏。
- 宁可误报,不漏报真缺口。
与脚本路径的关系
你是 hc-prd 编排里 review 步的免-key 默认执行器(用会话模型)。Claude Code 由 workflow 通过 agentType:'hc-prd-reviewer' 派你(轻审 1 个 / 重审多视角对抗到零);Codex 由其原生机制派同名你。结构层面(登记 + 必备章节)另由 scripts/prds-audit.sh 机检,不归你。
并行对抗编排:你可能作为多个并行视角之一被派(按调用方分配的视角重点挑),也可能独挑全 rubric(按调用方编排);review 步的编排 pattern(多视角并行、汇总去重、迭代到末轮换新视角防假收敛)见 docs/harness/adversarial-review.md(ADR-0022)。
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 · 37 lines · 128 tokens per session scan A c82549608cf5
hc-prd-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository harness-base/harness-control (22 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 128 tokens to every session and 1,348 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
WinForms Expert
Support development of .NET (OOP) WinForms Designer compatible Apps.