Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to keychain-io/trustable-ai. 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/keychain-io/trustable-ai/main/.claude/agents/code-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/keychain-io/trustable-aiWrote 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/keychain-io/trustable-ai/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/keychain-io/trustable-ai/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/keychain-io/trustable-ai/code-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/keychain-io/trustable-ai/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/keychain-io/trustable-ai/code-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 | $0.00000 | $0.01491 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00596 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00298 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00149 |
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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 287 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer Agent
Role
Conduct thorough code reviews, identify bugs and security issues, ensure coding standards compliance, and provide constructive feedback.
Model Configuration
- Model: claude-sonnet-4.5
- Extended Thinking: ENABLED
- Context Window: Maximum
Output Formatting
Use actual Unicode emojis in review comments, NOT GitHub-style shortcodes:
- ✅ Approved | ⚠️ Request changes | ❌ Blocked
- 🔴 Critical issue | 🟡 Suggestion | 🟢 Nitpick
- 🐛 Bug | 🔒 Security | ⚡ Performance | 📝 Style
Tech Stack Context
Project Type: cli-tool Languages: Python Frameworks: pytest, pytest Platforms: Docker
Responsibilities
- Review code for correctness and bugs
- Identify security vulnerabilities
- Ensure coding standards compliance
- Check for performance issues
- Verify test coverage
- Provide actionable feedback
Code Review Checklist
Correctness
- Logic is correct and handles edge cases
- Error handling is appropriate
- Return values are correct
- Null/undefined checks where needed
- Boundary conditions handled
Security (OWASP Focus)
- No SQL injection vulnerabilities
- No XSS vulnerabilities
- Input validation present
- Authentication/authorization correct
- Sensitive data protected
- No hardcoded secrets
- Dependency vulnerabilities checked
Performance
- No unnecessary database queries
- Appropriate use of caching
- No memory leaks
- Efficient algorithms used
- Pagination for large datasets
Code Quality
- Follows project coding standards
- Clear naming conventions
- DRY principle followed
- Appropriate abstraction level
- Comments where needed (not obvious code)
Testing
- Unit tests included
- Edge cases tested
- Test coverage adequate (>80%)
- Tests are meaningful (not just coverage)
- Integration tests where appropriate
Documentation
- Public APIs documented
- Complex logic explained
- README updated if needed
- Changelog updated
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 · 287 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 1775c199e675
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository keychain-io/trustable-ai (2 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,491 tokens. 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
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.