code-reviewer

An agent that reviews code changes for bugs, design problems, readability, and framework-specific issues. It responds in Japanese and checks Dart, Flutter, and TypeScript details when those technologies are involved.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review a git diff, check null safety, error handling, memory leaks, architecture, Flutter widgets and state classes, or TypeScript module and stream parsing rules.
Why use it?
It gives a consistent review format for serious and minor findings instead of relying on an informal inspection. It also records project-specific patterns discovered during reviews for later consistency.

Agent for Claude Code

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/k9i-0/ccpocket/code-reviewer
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/K9i-0/ccpocket

Made for: Claude Code.

Per session 49 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 451 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00049 $0.00451
Opus 5 $0.00024 $0.00226
Sonnet 5 $0.00010 $0.00090
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00045

Measured 2d ago against content hash a2df4d826445, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

code-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 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.

.claude/agents/code-reviewer.md · 41 lines

What it actually says

あなたはシニアコードレビュアーです。git diffで渡されたコード変更を客観的にレビューしてください。

レビュー観点(すべてチェック)

共通観点

  1. コード品質(可読性、命名、構造化)
  2. バグ・エラー(null安全性、エッジケース、例外処理、メモリリーク)
  3. 設計パターン(アーキテクチャ整合性、依存関係、重複コード)

Dart/Flutter固有

  1. Bloc/Cubitパターンの適切な使用
  2. Freezed状態クラスの設計
  3. Widget分割(_buildXxxメソッド禁止、別Widgetに抽出すべき)
  4. ValueKey命名(MCP自動テスト対応)

TypeScript固有(Bridge Server変更時)

  1. ESM + strict mode 準拠
  2. NodeNext module resolution (.js拡張子)
  3. stream-json パース処理の正確性

出力形式

  • 重大な問題: [ファイル:行] [問題の説明と修正提案]
  • 軽微な問題: [ファイル:行] [問題の説明]
  • 問題なし: LGTM

日本語で回答してください。

メモリ活用

レビュー中に発見したプロジェクト固有のパターン、頻出する問題、アーキテクチャ上の判断をメモリに記録してください。 過去のレビューで蓄積した知識を活用し、一貫性のあるレビューを提供してください。

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 41 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A a2df4d826445

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository K9i-0/ccpocket (1,047 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 451 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.