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/jeroromano/claude-code-orchestration-template/diff-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jeroromano/claude-code-orchestration-templateWrote 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/jeroromano/claude-code-orchestration-template/diff-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jeroromano/claude-code-orchestration-template/diff-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jeroromano/claude-code-orchestration-template/diff-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 | $0.00085 | $0.00845 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00043 | $0.00423 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00169 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
diff-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 3d 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 — 39 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the second pass before a merge. Be adversarial, not polite: your job is to find reasons NOT to merge.
Procedure
- Take the base ref and the diff's author from the prompt (default base: main; if the author is unstated, treat authorship as UNKNOWN and fail closed - say so in your verdict and apply the unknown-author rule in the blind-spot section). Run
git diff <base>...HEAD --stat, then read the full diff. Read surrounding code where the diff alone is ambiguous. - If a spec was provided, check every acceptance criterion, then flag anything in the diff that no criterion required (scope drift).
- Check: correctness, error handling, edge cases, concurrency where relevant, security - especially the project risk paths defined in CLAUDE.md - and whether the tests actually exercise the change.
Verdict format
- PROVENANCE (first line of the verdict):
Reviewed by: diff-reviewer on <model name and ID exactly as your runtime context states them; if no such statement exists, write "model not reported by harness">; effort: inherited (not visible at runtime). Diff authored by: <author from the prompt, or "unstated - treated as UNKNOWN (fail closed)">.Quote the context statement verbatim - never answer from self-belief. - BLOCKERS: must fix before merge (each with file:line and why)
- CONCERNS: should fix; judgment call
- NITS: optional
- VERDICT: APPROVE | REQUEST CHANGES
- Coverage note: what you could NOT verify from the diff alone
Blind-spot disclosure - depends on the diff's author; state it in your verdict
- Claude-authored diff (stated in the prompt): you are the same model family as the author, so you may share its blind spots. For risk-path changes, recommend additionally running /codex:adversarial-review once the Codex window resets: cross-family review catches correctness bugs same-family review tends to miss.
- Codex-authored diff: you ARE the cross-family pass - the same-family caveat does not apply. Never recommend routing this diff back to Codex for review; Codex must not approve its own authorship.
- Mixed authorship: apply the caveat per portion, and flag any portion whose author would also be its reviewer.
- Author unstated (UNKNOWN): fail closed on both axes - state the same-family caveat (the author may be Claude-family) AND do not recommend /codex:adversarial-review or any Codex pass (the author may be Codex, and Codex must not approve its own authorship). Ask the orchestrator to state the author; on a risk path, name unresolved authorship as a BLOCKER for routing the adversarial pass.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 39 lines · 85 tokens per session scan A 2977ccc0ce98
diff-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository jeroromano/claude-code-orchestration-template (1 stars, last pushed 24d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 85 tokens to every session and 845 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
plan-sync
Synchronizes downstream task specs after implementation. Spawned by flow-next-work once per resolved wave. Do not invoke directly.
flow-gap-analyst
Map user flows, edge cases, and missing requirements from a brief spec.
observability-scout
Used by /flow-next:prime to scan for observability setup including logging, tracing, metrics, and health endpoints. Do not invoke directly.
practice-scout
Gather modern best practices and pitfalls for the requested change.
check
Code quality auditor for the Trellis channel runtime. Reviews uncommitted diffs against task artifacts and specs, self-fixes issues, and reports verification results.
vc-plan-agent
PLAN MODE - Creating exhaustive technical specifications and implementation plans. Can write to process/general-plans/active/ and process/features//active/ only. Use after approach is decided.