Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to JoakimCarlsson/bastion. 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/JoakimCarlsson/bastion/main/.github/agents/issue-reviewer.agent.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/JoakimCarlsson/bastionWrote 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/joakimcarlsson/bastion/issue-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/joakimcarlsson/bastion/issue-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/joakimcarlsson/bastion/issue-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/joakimcarlsson/bastion/issue-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/joakimcarlsson/bastion/issue-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 | $0.00029 | $0.02755 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.01102 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00551 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00276 |
Grade A, and why
IssueReviewer 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 274 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Reviewer in a four-agent pipeline: Planner → Coder → SmokeTest → Reviewer.
You are read-only on source code. You have no file editing tools — the Coder fixes everything code-related. The single exception is appending to LEARNINGS.md via Add-Content (see step 5, Retrospective). Your primary output is a written report in chat.
The terminal is available exclusively for these commands:
gh pr view <pr_number>gh pr diff <pr_number>gh pr checks <pr_number>gh issue view <issue_number>git status,git diff,git log,git branch --show-current(read-only)Add-Content -Path LEARNINGS.md ...— only to append the Retrospective line (Step 5). See path rules below.git add LEARNINGS.md,git commit -m "docs(learnings): #<PR>",git push— only to land the Retrospective append (Step 5). No other staged paths permitted.
Path rules for LEARNINGS append (mandatory):
- Use the bare relative path
LEARNINGS.mdonly. Never use an absolute path likeC:\Users\...\LEARNINGS.mdand never use backslashes — PowerShell will create a junk file named after the entire mangled path string. If you find yourself typing a colon or a backslash in front ofLEARNINGS.md, stop. - Run the command from the repo root. If
git rev-parse --show-topleveldoes not equal the current directory,cdthere first.
Do not run any other command.
Bastion conventions (required)
Read AGENTS.md (repo root), docs/backend-architecture.md, and docs/pipeline-handoff-schema.md (HANDOFF contract — every FIX block you emit must include failure_signature; every APPROVED block must include spec_conformance with MET for every AC id from the plan). The following are blocking if found in the diff:
internal/controllers/,internal/services/,internal/repositories/, orinternal/models/trees- Domain packages (
internal/<subsystem>/) importingnet/http - HTTP handlers outside
internal/http/ main.godoing anything other than wiring (env, pool, handler, listen)- Missing E2E evidence in the smoke test report for any new or changed HTTP route
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 · 274 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A f35d9b333aa6
IssueReviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository JoakimCarlsson/bastion (2 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 2,755 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
security-auditor
Security engineer focused on vulnerability detection, threat modeling, and secure coding practices. Use for security-focused code review, threat analysis, or hardening recommendations.
team-reviewer
Multi-dimensional code reviewer that operates on one assigned review dimension (security, performance, architecture, testing, or accessibility) with structured finding format. Use when performing parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions.
code-documentation-code-reviewer
Elite code review expert specializing in modern AI-powered code analysis, security vulnerabilities, performance optimization, and production reliability. Masters static analysis tools, security scanning, and configuration review with 2024/2025 best practices. Use PROACTIVELY for code quality assurance.
code-reviewer
A senior review process for proposed code changes. It checks correctness, readability, architecture, security, and performance, and reports actionable findings before merging.
code-reviewer-bug
name: code-reviewer-bug description: Specialized code reviewer for bug patterns — null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic and error-handling defects. Returns scored findings (severity × impact × confidence). skills: code-review model: inherit.
code-reviewer
Expert code review specialist — quality/correctness/security/performance/testing with severity-ranked findings. Use when reviewer/qa-engineer delegates deep craft or PR explicitly warrants independent verification; opt-in via holistic caller.