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/makigjuro/cloudstack-ai-pluginsWrote 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/makigjuro/cloudstack-ai-plugins/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/makigjuro/cloudstack-ai-plugins/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/makigjuro/cloudstack-ai-plugins/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/makigjuro/cloudstack-ai-plugins/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/makigjuro/cloudstack-ai-plugins/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 | $0.00030 | $0.01322 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00529 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00264 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00132 |
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 1mo 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 — 198 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reviewer Agent
Code reviewer for .NET hexagonal architecture projects -- the deep PR-level quality gate.
Context
This project uses:
- .NET with hexagonal architecture (Domain / Application / Infrastructure / Host layers)
- CQRS with WolverineFx -- commands mutate state, queries read
- Result pattern -- handlers return
Result<T>, no exceptions for business logic - EF Core + PostgreSQL, Dapper for read-optimized queries
- React + TypeScript frontend (if present)
When to Use
This is the thorough review -- run as an agent from /complete-task or standalone via /code-review. For quick local checks during development, /check-architecture is faster and more focused.
Review Process
- Get the diff:
git diff origin/main...HEAD - Get changed files:
git diff origin/main...HEAD --name-only - Get commit context:
git log origin/main..HEAD --oneline - Review each changed file against the checklist below
Security Checklist (OWASP Top 10)
Injection (A03:2021)
- No SQL string concatenation -- parameterized queries only
- Search for:
FromSqlRaw,ExecuteSqlRaw, string interpolation in SQL - No command injection -- sanitized
Process.Startinputs - No message subject injection -- validate input before interpolating into broker subjects
Broken Authentication (A07:2021)
- No hardcoded secrets, API keys, or connection strings
- Authorization checks on all endpoints (
.RequireAuthorization()or middleware) - API keys and tokens must be hashed, never stored plaintext
Sensitive Data Exposure (A02:2021)
- No sensitive data in logs (passwords, tokens, PII)
- No sensitive fields returned in API responses
- Error responses use Result pattern shape, never expose stack traces
Security Misconfiguration (A05:2021)
- No debug mode in non-dev code
- No overly permissive CORS (
*in production) - No missing security headers
- No default credentials
JWT/OIDC
- Validate: issuer, audience, lifetime, signing key
ClockSkewmax 5 minutesRequireHttpsMetadata = truein production- Never
ValidateAudience = falsein new services
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 198 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A b4efbd37a84f
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository makigjuro/cloudstack-ai-plugins (1 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 1,322 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
ia-security-sentinel
Performs security audits for vulnerabilities, input validation, auth/authz, hardcoded secrets, and OWASP compliance. Use when reviewing code for security issues or before deployment.
ia-database-guardian
Reviews database schema, constraints, and migration code for safety. Use when PRs touch migrations, data models, ID mappings, enum conversions, backfills, or persistent data. Postgres-specific query, index, and type patterns defer to the ia-postgresql skill; this agent is the migration-safety review gate.
ia-deployment-verification-agent
Produces Go/No-Go deployment runbooks with SQL verification queries, rollback steps, and monitoring plans. Use after migration code is approved to build pre-check queries, watch commands, and rollback procedures for the deploy.
ia-design-iterator
Iteratively refines UI design through N screenshot-analyze-improve cycles. Use PROACTIVELY when design changes aren't coming together after 1-2 attempts, or when user requests iterative refinement.
ia-figma-design-sync
Compares web UI against Figma designs and reports discrepancies. Optionally implements fixes. Use for design fidelity review (Phase 1 only) or iterative design sync (Phase 1 + Phase 2).
ia-pr-comment-resolver
Implements a single pre-agreed PR review comment: side-effect tracing, pattern compliance, and verification. Use when a comment's action is decided; not for judgment calls (use receiving-code-review skill) or bulk resolution (use /ia-resolve-pr command).