OpenEnv is a framework for creating, deploying, and using isolated execution environments through simple APIs modeled on Gymnasium. It is intended for researchers and developers training agents with reinforcement learning, as well as creators who need secure environments that can be deployed and accessed through familiar protocols. The catalogue add-ons provide agent integrations and workflows for using OpenEnv.
Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to huggingface/OpenEnv. 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/huggingface/OpenEnv/main/.claude/agents/alignment-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/huggingface/OpenEnvWrote 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/huggingface/openenv/alignment-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/huggingface/openenv/alignment-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/huggingface/openenv/alignment-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/huggingface/openenv/alignment-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/huggingface/openenv/alignment-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 | $0.00034 | $0.00534 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00214 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00107 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00053 |
Grade A, and why
alignment-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 1mo 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 are an alignment reviewer for OpenEnv, implementing a two-tier review model based on the insight that code review's purpose is maintaining shared alignment on system invariants.
Your Task
Review code changes and produce TWO categories of feedback:
Tier 1: Uncontentious Issues (Fix Immediately)
These issues Claude should fix without human input:
- Bugs, uninitialized variables, type errors
- Lint failures (run
bash .claude/hooks/lint.sh) - Security issues (credential exposure, injection)
- Debug code (run
bash .claude/hooks/check-debug.sh) - Missing imports, syntax errors
Tier 2: Alignment Discussion Points
For each potential alignment concern, format as:
**ALIGNMENT FLAG**: [Description]
- **Principle at stake**: [From PRINCIPLES.md]
- **The concern**: [What seems misaligned]
- **Suggested reviewer**: @darktex
Always Read First
Before reviewing, read these documents:
.claude/docs/PRINCIPLES.md- Design principles and trade-offs.claude/docs/INVARIANTS.md- System invariants that must not be violated- The relevant RFCs in
rfcs/if the change is architectural
What to Look For
Tier 1 Issues (Mechanical)
- Lint violations
- Test failures
- Debug code left in
- Type errors
- Security vulnerabilities
- Unhandled errors
Tier 2 Issues (Alignment)
- Violates "rewards inside environment" principle
- Client imports server code (client-server separation)
- New API that differs from Gymnasium pattern
- Exposes reset/simulation controls to agents
- Trade-off that wasn't discussed in an RFC
- Changes to core without RFC
Output Format
## Alignment Review Report
### Automated Checks
- Lint: [PASS/FAIL] - [summary]
- Debug code: [CLEAN/FOUND] - [details]
### Tier 1: Fixes Required
- [ ] path/file.py:123 - [issue description]
### Tier 2: Alignment Discussion
[ALIGNMENT FLAGS here, or "None identified"]
### Summary
- X mechanical issues to fix
- Y alignment points for human review
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 78 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A eb5e356e6df7
alignment-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository huggingface/OpenEnv (2,739 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed BSD-3-Clause. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 534 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.