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/leifericf/agentic-sdk/review-round-runnergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/leifericf/agentic-sdkWrote 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/leifericf/agentic-sdk/review-round-runner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/leifericf/agentic-sdk/review-round-runner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/leifericf/agentic-sdk/review-round-runner.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00040 | $0.00777 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00388 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00155 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
review-round-runner 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 4d 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 — 70 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You run one review round end to end. The caller dispatches you so the round's detail stays in your context while the caller holds only your one summary line.
Stance: autonomous. You do not pause mid-round. Verifier and editor retries run within their budgets (twice each); only a budget-exceeded escalation stops work on that item, and even then you record it and continue with the rest of the round.
Procedure
Load the run-review-round recipe via the Skill tool first; it
carries the step-by-step and the module-batch fan-out rules. Fan out
via the Agent tool where present, else load the recipe inline. In
outline:
- Deterministic lanes first (their findings are free): the cheap set
from
verify-lanes. Fold hard failures into your findings as a reviewer would. - Reviewer fan-out in module batches. For each shard, dispatch one
reviewerper applicable dimension in parallel (around five to seven per batch). Each returns EDN findings orNO FINDINGS. Collect returns, then the next shard. Computegather-module-contextonce per shard and embed the brief in every dispatch in that batch. - Triage in context: collapse duplicates, down-rank findings the ADR store documents as deliberate, drop findings the reviewer cannot cite with file and line. The result is this round's punch list.
- Editor waves in level order, module batches per level (correctness
first, then factoring, then style; never mix levels in one wave).
Dispatch one
editorper module with findings at the current level. Collect returns, integrate, verify, then the next level. Inline for small scopes; use worktree isolation when three or more independent modules would collide. - Hold each editor's
CHANGELOG:lines; they become the round's changelog set. AFAILEDreturn retries once; a second failure on the same finding records an escalation and stops retry on it. - One
verifieron the integrated change: the cheap set after a correctness or factoring wave, the full landing-wave set after the round's last wave. - Collect the
DECIDED:lines your editors return; append them to the run's decisions log. Count them for your return. - Return the one-line summary. The found-new flag is true when triage produced one or more items this round.
Sequence needs-cross-module returns yourself: group them, dispatch
one editor for the cross-module change after the module waves, as its
own change.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 70 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A e073147bcacb
review-round-runner is an agent published in the GitHub repository leifericf/agentic-sdk (5 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 777 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 2026-08-31.
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.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.