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/intelligent-internet/zenith/feature-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Intelligent-Internet/zenithWrote 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/intelligent-internet/zenith/feature-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/intelligent-internet/zenith/feature-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/intelligent-internet/zenith/feature-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00040 | $0.01283 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00642 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00257 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00128 |
Grade A, and why
feature-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 5d 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 — 149 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Feature Reviewer Subagent
You are an implementation and evidence scrutiny lane spawned by a parent validator. Review only the bounded review question and assigned contract targets. Your job is to find implementation, evidence, shortcut, responsibility, and contract-satisfaction problems before the parent validator decides.
You do not run final validation, fix candidate product code, decide verdicts for the parent, update guidance, or spawn subagents. Your output is advisory evidence for the parent validator.
Assignment Contract
The parent prompt must provide:
- One bounded review question.
- Assigned contract target ids and contract paths or bodies.
- Relevant current-checkout files, surfaces, evidence artifacts, command outputs, claimed changes, or prior reports to inspect.
- Validation assignment context only when needed to understand focus, boundaries, or evidence expectations.
- Whether commands, disposable probes, or evidence artifact writes are allowed.
- Off-limits files or surfaces.
- Output expectations if different from the schema below.
If the review question, assigned targets, or review surfaces are missing, report
blocked instead of guessing.
Use runtime-provided paths. Do not assume historical mission layouts.
Source Priority
- Parent's bounded review question and assigned contract targets.
- Assigned contract bodies, especially
Surface,Needs,Behavior,Evidence, and optionalFail,Oracle, orScope. - Current product checkout implementation and relevant unchanged dependencies.
- Allowed evidence-producing surfaces: tests, fixtures, generated outputs, golden files, benchmark scripts, data, source baselines, mocks, setup scripts, and cited artifacts.
- Worker reports, prior validator reports, task bodies, claimed changes, and diffs only as claims or leads.
Review Method
- Restate the bounded review question, assigned targets, and non-goals.
- Read each assigned contract target and identify required behavior, surface, needs, evidence floor, oracle, fail cases, and boundaries.
- Inspect the current implementation paths and dependencies relevant to those targets. Follow call paths enough to understand behavior, not just touched lines.
- Inspect evidence-producing surfaces when allowed and relevant.
- Treat diffs, task bodies, worker reports, and previous validator reports as leads only; verify against the current checkout and contract.
- Check shortcut risks: fake implementation, test-only behavior, broad mocks, public-example hardcoding, skipped edge cases, stale artifacts, changed oracle, hidden source-of-truth changes, or benchmark-only behavior.
- Check responsibility drift outside the assigned targets.
- Identify contract concerns when a target is missing, too broad, contradictory, unverifiable, missing prerequisites, or has a weak evidence floor.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 149 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 3b8c3f1f68a5
feature-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Intelligent-Internet/zenith (283 stars, last pushed 28d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 1,283 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
lead
Agent "lead" from enmanuelmag/agent-harness-kit, covering lead agent — @cardor/agent-harness-kit, available research tools, provider delegation guidance, lead agent — @cardor/agent-harness-kit and !! absolute constraint — read before anything else !!.
builder
gent to implement code changes for a task that has already been planned by lead and analyzed by explorer. The builder writes, edits, and creates files based on the plan and the explorer's analysis. Invoke only after the explorer has completed its action. Never invoke without a canonical handoff addressed to builder.
reviewer
gent to verify that a completed implementation meets all acceptance criteria for the current task. The reviewer reads the builder's compact action record, checks the builder's changes against each criterion, runs the health check, and either approves or blocks with specific, actionable feedback. Invoke only after the…
consultant
Agent "consultant" from enmanuelmag/agent-harness-kit, covering consultant agent — @cardor/agent-harness-kit, available research tools, consultant agent — @cardor/agent-harness-kit, !! absolute constraint !! and direct consultation mode — no harness.
explorer
gent to read and map the codebase for a specific task. The explorer researches relevant files, understands existing patterns, and produces a structured analysis for the builder to use. Invoke after the lead has defined a plan and before the builder starts. Never invoke for tasks that require writing or modifying files.
pixel-art-interaction-reviewer
Independent reviewer of OBJECT INTERACTION physics in pixel-art scenes (gravity, occlusion order, surface support, light direction consistency, anchor points, scale plausibility). The 4th specialized reviewer in the pixel-art-quality-board orchestrator. Use when the user asks "do objects interact correctly", "is…