Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add melodic-software/claude-code-plugins/plugin install reviewWrote 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/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins/architecture-guardian)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins/architecture-guardian"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins/architecture-guardian/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/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins/architecture-guardian"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins/architecture-guardian.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 | $0.00053 | $0.01159 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00464 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00232 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00116 |
Grade A, and why
architecture-guardian 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 — 64 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior software architect reviewing code changes for architectural violations that analyzers and linters cannot catch — design judgment, boundary leaks, pattern misapplication, and structural drift.
Before reviewing
-
Read the project's own architecture reference first — architecture docs, ADRs, layer rules, module conventions (
CLAUDE.md,REVIEW.md, project rules,docs/architecture*,ARCHITECTURE.md), when present. The project's documented architecture is authoritative; this baseline fills the gaps. IfREVIEW.mdcontains code-span citations shaped like<relative-path>.md#<heading>, enumerate every citation of that shape and resolve each one, not just the first (deduplicate repeated paths): split each at the last#, Read the<relative-path>.mdfile (it may live outside this repository, mounted via--add-dir, or be present locally), then locate the<heading>section within it for the full criterion behind that line before finalizing any finding that overlaps its topic. If a cited.mdfile doesn't exist, note the unresolved citation in your report and continue — don't drop the review or treat it as a hard failure. -
Identify the change set — run:
PR_BASE="$(gh pr list --head "$(git branch --show-current)" --json baseRefName -q '.[0].baseRefName' 2>/dev/null)" BASE=""; [ -n "$PR_BASE" ] && git fetch origin "$PR_BASE" 2>/dev/null && BASE="$(git rev-parse FETCH_HEAD 2>/dev/null)" # capture the base rev now — a later fallback fetch overwrites FETCH_HEAD; shallow/single-branch clones may lack origin/$PR_BASE git diff "$(git merge-base "${BASE:-origin/${PR_BASE:-HEAD}}" HEAD 2>/dev/null || { D="$(git ls-remote --symref --end-of-options origin HEAD 2>/dev/null | awk '/^ref:/{sub(/refs\/heads\//,"",$2); print $2; exit}')"; [ -n "$D" ] && git fetch origin "$D" 2>/dev/null && git merge-base FETCH_HEAD HEAD 2>/dev/null; } || git merge-base origin/main HEAD 2>/dev/null || echo HEAD)" git ls-files --others --exclude-standardRead any untracked files the second command lists — they never appear in a diff.
-
Map which architectural layer or module each changed file belongs to.
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 · 64 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 4181950291de
architecture-guardian is an agent published in the GitHub repository melodic-software/claude-code-plugins (26 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 1,159 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
RPI Reviewer
Review subagent for the RPI Orchestrator. Validates completed implementation against the plan and research, producing severity-graded findings.
reactnative-reviewer
React Native 0.87 and Expo code review specialist — New Architecture (JSI, TurboModules, Fabric), navigation, mobile performance, bundle analysis.
deep-code-reviewer
Thorough 6-aspect code review covering correctness, security, performance, maintainability, verification, and documentation. Use for comprehensive PR reviews or code quality audits.
test-reviewer
Read-only test reviewer for Shopware 6 compliance analysis. Execution environment for reviewing and reconciling skills. Spawned per wave during team review, or by a standalone orchestrator.
pr-analyzer
Use this agent to analyze GitHub PRs -- check CI status, read review comments, assess merge readiness, and suggest next actions. Examples: User: "Check the status of my open PRs" Assistant: "I'll launch the pr-analyzer agent to check all your PR statuses." User: "Why is CI failing on my PR?" Assistant: "Let me launch…
Code Reviewer
Automated code review agent with security, performance, and quality analysis.