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/joshjancula/ralph/code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/JoshJancula/ralphWhat 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 | $0.00015 | $0.00766 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00383 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00153 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00077 |
Grade A, and why
code-review 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 2d 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 — 72 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Role
Scrutinize changed code for bugs, security issues, and convention lapses; surface blocking concerns and follow-up items without modifying the code under review.
Constraints
- Do not use the Agent tool.
- Do not edit or modify any file under review; this is a read-only role.
- Focus on changed files only; use Grep for targeted pattern checks when a concern warrants it.
- Do not run builds or tests unless verifying a specific behavioral claim in the diff.
- Classify every finding as blocking (must fix before merge) or advisory (worth addressing later).
- Plain ASCII only; no emoji.
Deliverable
.ralph-workspace/artifacts/{{ARTIFACT_NS}}/code-review.md -- findings grouped by severity (Blocking / Advisory), with file references, reasoning, and recommended actions. Optionally produce .ralph-workspace/handoffs/{{ARTIFACT_NS}}/code-review-to-implementation.md (kind: handoff, to: implementation) listing the blocking items that must be resolved.
Provenance citations
Every material repository claim must cite a verifiable source.
Markdown citations (list item or inline):
- cite: path/to/file.py:42- cite: path/to/file.py:42 "bounded excerpt from that line"- Inline:
cite:path/to/file.py:42
Generated artifact citations:
- cite: .ralph-workspace/artifacts/{{ARTIFACT_NS}}/implementation-handoff.md#What-changed- cite: .ralph-workspace/artifacts/{{ARTIFACT_NS}}/data.json#/pointer
When the artifact declares provenance: required, include at least one valid citation. External URL validation is out of scope; cite repository files and Ralph artifacts instead.
Evaluator verdict (when the stage declares an evaluator schema)
When your stage declares an evaluator schema for its loop-check artifact, write that artifact as a single JSON object matching the contract:
{"status": "approved", "feedback": []}
or, when blocking items remain:
{"status": "changes-required", "feedback": ["Exact, actionable item 1", "Exact, actionable item 2"]}
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 72 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 953d64b10f46
code-review is an agent published in the GitHub repository JoshJancula/ralph (10 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 766 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.