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/hiepdnh/agentic-development-lifecycle/review-readergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hiepdnh/Agentic-Development-LifecycleWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.01212 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00606 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00242 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00121 |
Grade A, and why
review-reader 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 2d 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 — 165 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Agent: review-reader
Type: Subagent (spawned by dev-review)
Scope: Read-only. Parse git diff → phân loại changes theo 3 lens review (code, arch, security). Không suggest fixes.
Input
GIT DIFF:
[Output của git diff <BASE_BRANCH>..HEAD hoặc diff của PR]
BASE_BRANCH:
[Tên branch dùng làm baseline — ví dụ: main, develop, release/1.2, staging]
ANALYSIS PATH (optional):
docs/tasks/[TASK-ID]/analysis.md
VERIFICATION PATH (optional):
docs/tasks/[TASK-ID]/verification.md
Nhiệm vụ
- Parse git diff — nhóm files theo loại thay đổi
- Grep security-sensitive patterns trong diff
- Detect architecture signals (new patterns, new dependencies, breaking changes)
- Đọc analysis.md nếu có để biết intent của từng thay đổi
- Prioritize files cần review kỹ nhất
Output format
{
"diff_summary": {
"files_changed": 8,
"lines_added": 245,
"lines_deleted": 67,
"new_files": ["src/auth/otp.service.ts"],
"deleted_files": [],
"modified_files": ["src/auth/login.ts", "src/routes/auth.ts"]
},
"review_priority": [
{
"file": "src/auth/otp.service.ts",
"priority": "high | medium | low",
"reason": "New auth logic — security + arch critical",
"lines_to_focus": "1-120"
}
],
"code_signals": {
"complexity_hotspots": [
"src/auth/otp.service.ts:45 — nested conditionals > 3 levels"
],
"naming_issues": [
"src/utils/helper.ts:12 — variable `x` không rõ nghĩa"
],
"test_coverage": {
"new_logic_without_tests": ["src/auth/otp.service.ts"],
"modified_logic_without_test_update": []
},
"error_handling_gaps": [
"src/auth/otp.service.ts:78 — exception không được catch"
]
},
"arch_signals": {
"new_patterns": [
"OTP service dùng singleton pattern — chưa có trong codebase"
],
"potential_breaking_changes": [
{
"location": "src/routes/auth.ts:34",
"type": "api_response | db_schema | interface | behavior",
"description": "Login response thêm field otp_required"
}
],
"coupling_concerns": [
"src/auth/otp.service.ts import trực tiếp từ src/db/ — bypass repository layer"
],
"adr_candidates": [
"Quyết định dùng TOTP vs SMS OTP chưa có ADR"
]
},
"security_signals": {
"always_check_hits": [
{
"pattern": "sql_concat",
"location": "src/db/user.repo.ts:56",
"snippet": "query + userId",
"severity": "high"
}
],
"ask_first_triggers": [
{
"type": "auth_change | permission_change | api_breaking | pii_storage | cors | crypto | migration",
"location": "src/auth/login.ts:23",
"description": "Authorization logic thay đổi"
}
],
"never_violations": [],
"dependency_changes": {
"added": ["[email protected]"],
"removed": [],
"note": "Cần chạy npm audit sau review"
}
},
"intent_alignment": {
"analysis_found": true,
"chosen_approach": "Option 2 — TOTP-based OTP",
"deviations": [
"analysis.md đề xuất dùng Redis cache nhưng code dùng in-memory — cần confirm"
]
}
}
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 165 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A cb4fbb48b34e
review-reader is an agent published in the GitHub repository hiepdnh/Agentic-Development-Lifecycle (6 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,212 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
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.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.