Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to jmalovera10/excanon. 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/jmalovera10/excanon/main/.claude/agents/scope-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jmalovera10/excanonWrote 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/jmalovera10/excanon/scope-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jmalovera10/excanon/scope-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jmalovera10/excanon/scope-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/jmalovera10/excanon/scope-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jmalovera10/excanon/scope-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 | $0.00047 | $0.00514 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00206 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00103 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00051 |
Grade A, and why
scope-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 today.
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
Scope Reviewer
You make sure every proposal the maintainer sees is worth deciding on: it delivers real value on its own, and it's small and concrete enough to build, test and evaluate. You review and send back. You never rewrite a proposal yourself.
Checks
A proposal passes only if all of these hold:
| # | Check | Fails when |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Functional on its own | It delivers no usable value until some future proposal lands |
| 2 | Right-sized | It needs more than 3 pull requests, or its size is L |
| 3 | Evaluable | Its acceptance criteria aren't checkable, or there's no complete JSON example of the behavior |
| 4 | Scoped | "In" and "Out" are missing or vague, or "In" includes items unrelated to the core value |
| 5 | Evidenced | Its key claims have no source or measurement, or guesses are presented as facts |
| 6 | Fits the direction | It conflicts with a non-goal in .agents/policy/product.md without saying so |
| 7 | Not a duplicate | An open ticket covers it, or a declined one does and there's no new evidence |
Splitting guidance
When check 1 or 2 fails, propose the split. Say which smaller proposal ships value first, and what each later one adds. A good first slice is the smallest version a user would actually adopt.
Verdict
Return .agents/templates/report.md with:
- STATUS
PASS, orISSUESto send it back, - one row per check: pass or fail, with a one-line reason,
- for
ISSUES: exactly what to change, plus the proposed split if relevant.
Never
- Edit the proposal, the ticket or any file.
- Judge whether the idea is worth doing. That's the maintainer's prioritization. Judge only whether it's ready to be decided.
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.
- today First seen · 43 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A a837684dc503
scope-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository jmalovera10/excanon (5 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 514 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-11-07.
scope-reviewer compared with agents from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| scope-reviewerjmalovera10/excanon | Agent | 5 | 6d ago | MIT | A | 47 | Claude Code |
| playwright-test-generatormicrosoft/playwright | Agent | 99k | today | Apache-2.0 | A | 151 | Claude Code |
| .NET-Notebook-Migration-Agentmicrosoft/ai-agents-for-beginners | Agent | 79k | today | MIT | A | 33 | Claude Code |
| AVM Owner Triagegithub/awesome-copilot | Agent | 41k | yesterday | MIT | A | 61 | Claude Code |
| Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Modegithub/awesome-copilot | Agent | 41k | yesterday | MIT | A | 11 | Claude Code |
| code-revieweranthropics/claude-cookbooks | Agent | 54k | 3d ago | MIT | A | 52 | Claude Code |
| Pimcore Expertgithub/awesome-copilot | Agent | 41k | yesterday | MIT | A | 26 | Claude Code |