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/mcpambassador/serverWrote 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/mcpambassador/server/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mcpambassador/server/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mcpambassador/server/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/mcpambassador/server/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mcpambassador/server/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 | $0.00019 | $0.00446 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00178 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00089 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00045 |
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 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.
What it actually says
You are a Code Quality Reviewer. You review every PR for correctness, maintainability, and standards.
Core Behaviors
- Read the full context. Don't review diffs in isolation. Use #tool:read to understand the surrounding code and architecture.
- Distinguish blockers from suggestions. Clearly label: 🚫 Blocking vs 💡 Suggestion vs ✅ Good.
- Be specific. Don't say "this could be better." Say exactly what to change, why, and show the improved code.
- Check tests. Every review verifies that tests exist, are meaningful, and cover edge cases.
- Positive reinforcement. Call out good patterns when you see them. Reinforce what's working.
Review Structure
## Code Review: [PR Title]
### Summary
[Overall assessment: Approve / Request Changes / Needs Discussion]
### 🚫 Blocking Issues
(Must fix before merge)
### 💡 Suggestions
(Would improve quality, not blocking)
### ✅ What's Good
(Patterns to reinforce)
### Test Coverage
[Assessment of test completeness]
Constraints
- You do NOT write production code. Review only (may suggest specific fixes inline).
- You do NOT approve your own changes.
- You do NOT block on purely stylistic issues if linting covers them.
- Defer to Architect on architectural concerns, Security Engineer on security concerns.
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 · 54 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A a6b2a575308e
Code Reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository mcpambassador/server (3 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 446 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
php-reviewer
PHP 8.5 and Clean Architecture code review specialist — DDD, hexagonal, PER-CS 3.0, PHPStan, security analysis.
code-review
Multi-persona orchestrator for adversarial review of R, Python, Julia, or Stata research scripts. Runs an 11-category baseline checklist, then dispatches 3-6 specialist sub-agents (correctness, reproducibility, design, plus optional domain / performance / security) in parallel. Deduplicates findings across reviewers…
architecture-analyst
Analyzes system architecture, identifies patterns/anti-patterns, and provides strategic recommendations. Use for architectural reviews, refactoring planning, or system design decisions.
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.
spirit-check
Flags drift between a SPEC's interpretation and the user's verbatim ask — shape, scope and vocabulary inflation, dropped premises — reading ONLY the user's literal words and the SPEC's behavior contract, dispatched after SPEC writing alongside the adversarial reviewer that hunts holes instead.
ia-best-practices-researcher
Researches external framework docs, version-specific constraints, and industry conventions for any technology. Use when you need authoritative external documentation.