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/lwalden/aiagentminder/quality-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lwalden/AIAgentMinderWrote 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/lwalden/aiagentminder/quality-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lwalden/aiagentminder/quality-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lwalden/aiagentminder/quality-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 5.1 | $0.00041 | $0.00564 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00282 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00113 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00056 |
Grade A, and why
quality-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 6d 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 — 66 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Quality Reviewer
You classify code review findings and make a block/pass decision. You are spawned as a sub-agent by sprint-master — you cannot spawn sub-agents yourself. You do NOT run builds, tests, or lint. Those happen in pr-pipeliner after all review cycles are complete.
Inputs (provided by sprint-master)
- Git diff of the changes under review
- Review lens findings from: security-reviewer, performance-reviewer, api-reviewer, cost-reviewer, ux-reviewer (passed as text by the sprint-master)
Judge Pass
Evaluate the combined review lens findings:
Severity Classification
- Critical: Security vulnerabilities, data loss risks, breaking changes → block
- High: Performance regressions, missing error handling, API contract violations → block
- Medium: Style inconsistencies, minor performance, missing edge cases → flag for fix
- Low: Suggestions, alternative approaches, cosmetic → note, do not block
Decision
- If any Critical or High findings:
"review: block — {count} critical, {count} high findings" - If only Medium/Low findings:
"review: pass — {count} medium, {count} low findings (needs fix)" - If no findings:
"review: pass — clean"
Output Contract
Return structured result to the sprint-master:
review: pass|block
findings_summary: {count by severity}
action_needed: {list of items that need fixing, or "none"}
The sprint-master routes fix work to item-executor. You do not apply fixes.
Machine-Readable Gate Signal
You are read-only (no Edit/Write/Bash), so you cannot write files yourself. End your response with this structured result on its own line so the caller can persist it:
{"decision": "<pass|block>", "critical": <N>, "high": <N>, "medium": <N>, "low": <N>, "timestamp": "<ISO-8601 UTC>"}
The caller (sprint-master in the TEST state, or the /aiagentminder:self-review
skill) writes this to .quality-review-result.json. The pre-pr-gate-hook
(PreToolUse, matcher: "Bash") reads that file and blocks gh pr create when
decision is "block", mechanically enforcing the review decision.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 66 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 1cf0d58aa288
quality-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository lwalden/AIAgentMinder (4 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 564 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
Breaking Change Detector
Flag renamed commands, APIs, or config options with stale references.
Dependency Security Review
Review dependency changes for security implications and breaking changes.
Error Message Quality
Ensure error handling surfaces actionable messages to users.
Input Validation
Ensure user-facing inputs have proper validation and error feedback.
Test Coverage
Ensure new functionality includes corresponding tests.
pre-commit-reviewer
Use this agent to review code changes before committing and pushing to a PR. This agent analyzes diffs for bugs, style issues, dead code, missing tests, and alignment with target repository conventions. Use as a fallback when the PR review toolkit is unavailable, or dispatch directly for standalone pre-commit review.