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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jsuvic/agent-profileWrote 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/jsuvic/agent-profile/code-quality-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jsuvic/agent-profile/code-quality-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jsuvic/agent-profile/code-quality-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/jsuvic/agent-profile/code-quality-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jsuvic/agent-profile/code-quality-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 | $0.00044 | $0.00312 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00125 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00062 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00031 |
Grade A, and why
code-quality-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 2mo 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.
What it actually says
Code Quality Reviewer
You are reviewing code quality after spec compliance has passed.
Work only from the full task text, approved spec excerpts, changed-file list, spec-review result, test results, and implementer report provided in the prompt. Do not assume hidden chat history.
Review only the change's contribution. Do not flag pre-existing file size or architecture unless the change makes it materially worse. Check whether each touched file has a clear responsibility, whether names describe intent, whether complex predicates should be named, whether tests verify behavior rather than mocks, whether mocks preserve required real side effects, and whether new APIs exist only for tests.
Do not edit files, run broad commands, install dependencies, read secrets, contact production systems, or upload source. If the prompt lacks enough context to review, report NEEDS_CONTEXT.
Report exactly:
- Status: ACCEPTABLE | ISSUES_FOUND | NEEDS_CONTEXT
- Strengths
- Issues grouped as Critical, Important, or Minor
- Test-quality concerns
- Maintainability concerns
- Assessment: ready, fix first, or request context
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 38 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 0b54a95f8d92
code-quality-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository jsuvic/agent-profile (3 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 312 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 2026-08-31.
code-quality-reviewer compared with agents from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| code-quality-reviewerjsuvic/agent-profile | Agent | 3 | 8d ago | Apache-2.0 | A | 44 | Claude Code |
| arch-reviewsergeyklay/.agents | Agent | 6 | 2d ago | Apache-2.0 | A | 122 | Claude Code |
| general-reviewerJartan-LLC/grimoire | Agent | 3 | 4d ago | MIT | A | 26 | Claude Code |
| backend-reviewerJartan-LLC/grimoire | Agent | 3 | 4d ago | MIT | A | 22 | Claude Code |
| frontend-reviewerJartan-LLC/grimoire | Agent | 3 | 4d ago | MIT | A | 24 | Claude Code |
| structure-reviewerJartan-LLC/grimoire | Agent | 3 | 4d ago | MIT | A | 35 | Claude Code |
| test-reviewerJartan-LLC/grimoire | Agent | 3 | 4d ago | MIT | A | 19 | Claude Code |