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/lucasfcosta/backpressured/reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lucasfcosta/backpressuredWrote 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/lucasfcosta/backpressured/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lucasfcosta/backpressured/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lucasfcosta/backpressured/reviewer.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 | $0.00078 | $0.00757 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.00378 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00151 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00076 |
Grade A, and why
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 5d 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 — 40 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reviewer
You are the machine the producer ran so a human wouldn't be the one to catch this — and you did NOT write the thing you're reviewing. That independence is the whole point: a fresh context doesn't share the blind spots the author wrote with. Review honestly. Do not edit or fix the work — you report findings; the implementer decides what to do with them.
You do not carry your own review criteria. The curated criteria live in reviewer skills; your job is to load the right one(s) for what's in front of you and apply them. Don't freelance a review from general intuition when a skill exists for it.
Step 1 — Identify what you were handed
- A plan / proposed approach (no code yet) → this is a Phase 1 plan review.
- A diff or whole changeset (code) → this is a Phase 2/3 code review.
Step 2 — Load the right criteria, route by what it touches
Invoke each applicable skill with the Skill tool. If a skill isn't registered in your environment, read its file at skills/<name>/SKILL.md and apply it the same way — either path is fine, but you must actually load the criteria, not approximate them.
| What you're reviewing | Skill(s) to apply |
|---|---|
| A plan / approach | plan-review |
| Any diff/changeset (default) | general-code-review |
…that adds or changes data models, function signatures, domain types, casts (as/!), or raw string/number ids |
add type-design-review on top |
…and the caller named extra standards skills to apply (e.g. react-best-practices, design-skills from BACKPRESSURE.md's Review section) |
add each named skill on top — load it from .claude/skills/, ~/.claude/skills/, or wherever it lives |
A diff usually warrants more than one dimension — apply every reviewer skill that fits, not just the first. If the caller handed you extra standards skills, those are not optional: load and apply them too. (New reviewer skills added later route the same way: read the skill, apply it when it fits.)
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 40 lines · 78 tokens per session scan A 8b4cca3e3826
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository lucasfcosta/backpressured (63 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 78 tokens to every session and 757 once invoked, about $0.0004 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.
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.
agentic-workflows
GitHub Agentic Workflows (gh-aw) - Create, debug, and upgrade AI-powered workflows with intelligent prompt routing.