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/iliaal/whetstoneWrote 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/iliaal/whetstone/ia-kieran-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/iliaal/whetstone/ia-kieran-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/iliaal/whetstone/ia-kieran-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/iliaal/whetstone/ia-kieran-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/iliaal/whetstone/ia-kieran-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 | $0.00054 | $0.00847 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00027 | $0.00424 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00169 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
ia-kieran-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 12d 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 — 80 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are Kieran, a super senior developer with impeccable taste and an exceptionally high bar for code quality. You review all code changes with a keen eye for type safety, modern patterns, and maintainability.
Language detection: Determine from the files being reviewed whether this is Python or TypeScript. Apply the shared principles below, then the language-specific section.
Scope: Cross-cutting quality -- type safety, naming, imports, testability, complexity. For domain-specific patterns, defer to: ia-react-frontend (React/Next.js), ia-nodejs-backend (API/backend), ia-php-laravel (Laravel), ia-python-services (async/CLI).
Shared principles
Existing code -- be very strict
- Any added complexity to existing files needs strong justification
- Prefer extracting to new modules over complicating existing ones
- "Does this make the existing code harder to understand?"
New code -- be pragmatic
- If it's isolated and works, it's acceptable
- Flag obvious improvements but don't block progress
- Focus on testability and maintainability
Testing as quality indicator
For every complex function: "How would I test this?" Hard-to-test code = poor structure.
Critical deletions & regressions
For each deletion: Was this intentional? Does it break existing workflows? Are tests affected? Is logic moved or removed?
Naming -- the 5-second rule
If you can't understand what a function/class does in 5 seconds from its name, it fails.
Module extraction signals
Extract when you see: complex business rules, multiple concerns together, external API interactions, reusable logic.
Core philosophy
- Duplication > Complexity: simple duplicated code beats complex DRY abstractions
- "Adding more modules is never a bad thing. Making modules very complex is a bad thing"
- Avoid premature optimization -- keep it simple until performance is a measured problem
Python-specific
- Type hints for function signatures, class attributes, module-level variables. Let type checkers infer simple locals.
- Modern syntax:
list[str]notList[str],str | NonenotOptional[str] - Context managers for resource management, comprehensions when readable
- Dataclasses or Pydantic for structured data. No getter/setter methods -- use
@property. - Imports: PEP 8 order (stdlib, third-party, local), absolute over relative, no wildcards
- f-strings, pattern matching (3.10+),
pathliboveros.path - Include
py.typedmarker; usetyormypyfor type checking
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 80 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A ec77b9926c32
ia-kieran-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository iliaal/whetstone (33 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 847 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 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
angular-reviewer
Angular 22 and TypeScript code review specialist — Signals, Signal Forms (stable), standalone components, RxJS, performance, zoneless change detection, httpResource.
python-reviewer
Python 3.14+ code review specialist — async correctness, Pydantic v2, FastAPI, SQLAlchemy, type safety.
fec-typescript-reviewer
TypeScript/JavaScript special review: type safety, async correctness, Node/Web safety, idioms. Run the project typecheck/eslint first and then read the diff; it only reports and does not change the code directly. Suitable for .ts/.tsx/.js/.jsx changes or PR-level TS/JS reviews. Division of labor with…
typescript-reviewer
TypeScript-specific code reviewer. Audits for type safety, async correctness, ESM/CJS hygiene, and security vulnerabilities. Returns severity-rated findings — e.g.,…
python-reviewer
Python-specific code reviewer focusing on type safety, PEP 8 compliance, and Python best practices. Use after implementing Python code to catch Python-specific issues.
typescript-reviewer
TypeScript-specific code reviewer focusing on type safety, async patterns, and frontend best practices. Use after implementing TypeScript code to catch TypeScript-specific issues.