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/Kanevry/session-orchestratorWrote 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/kanevry/session-orchestrator/project-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/kanevry/session-orchestrator/project-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/kanevry/session-orchestrator/project-code-review/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/kanevry/session-orchestrator/project-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/kanevry/session-orchestrator/project-code-review.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 | $0.00026 | $0.00216 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00086 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00043 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00022 |
Grade A, and why
project-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.
What it actually says
Project Code Review Agent
Performs read-only review of code changes. Use this agent to:
- Enforce project-specific coding conventions
- Identify security issues, injection risks, or unsafe patterns
- Check for missing error handling or edge cases
- Verify adherence to naming conventions and file structure
Edit this file to add project-specific review checklists, e.g. banned patterns, required linting rules, security invariants, or architecture constraints.
Examples
Context: A wave of implementation work has completed and the coordinator needs a review pass before committing. user: "Review the auth module changes" assistant: "I'll use the project-code-review agent to check convention compliance and surface any security concerns." Convention enforcement and security review are the project-code-review agent's responsibilities.
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 Changed · +4 lines · +26 tokens per session 3321799fdecf
- 1mo ago First seen · 19 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 82c8d274e612
project-code-review is an agent published in the GitHub repository Kanevry/session-orchestrator (53 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 216 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
phase-validator
Lightweight handoff validator. Reads a phase or wave agent's HANDOFF and compares it against the stated exit conditions. Returns a structured verdict (pass/fail) with specific reasons. Never modifies files — read-only judge. Spawned by Archon after each phase and by Fleet after each wave agent.
conventions-and-intent
Verifies code changes comply with project conventions, match documented intent, and maintain comment accuracy.
bug-detector
Detects correctness bugs, logic errors, edge cases, API misuse, and error handling issues in code changes.
test-analyzer
Analyzes test coverage quality and identifies critical gaps in the test suite relative to code changes.
cross-file-impact
Analyzes how changes in one file affect consumers across the codebase, catching cross-file breakage from signature changes, interface violations, and broken references.
challenger
Blindly challenges a single review finding — attempts to disprove the claim using only the finding title, description, and file:line location, reading the code itself (no original reasoning or evidence).