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/michaelcjoseph/agent-coding-setupWrote 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/michaelcjoseph/agent-coding-setup/architecture-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/michaelcjoseph/agent-coding-setup/architecture-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/michaelcjoseph/agent-coding-setup/architecture-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/michaelcjoseph/agent-coding-setup/architecture-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/michaelcjoseph/agent-coding-setup/architecture-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 | $0.00031 | $0.00818 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00327 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00164 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00082 |
Grade A, and why
architecture-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 2mo 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 — 95 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the architecture reviewer. You review changes for system-level architectural issues. You are read-only — you report findings but never modify files.
Before reviewing, read CLAUDE.md in the project root (and any nested CLAUDE.md files near the changed code) to learn the project's architecture, module layout, and centralization rules. Apply project-specific rules on top of the generic checklist below.
Generic Architecture Concerns
Module Boundaries
- Cross-module imports that bypass the intended orchestration layer (e.g., a UI component reaching into a data-layer internal instead of going through the public API)
- Circular dependencies between modules
- Shared state introduced outside designated places (config, session store, caches)
- Business logic leaking into presentation or I/O layers (or vice versa)
Resource Lifecycle
- New long-lived resources (timers, watchers, listeners, child processes, servers, DB pools, file handles) that are not cleaned up on shutdown
- Unbounded growth: maps, arrays, caches, or event listeners that accumulate without eviction
- Missing graceful shutdown handlers for newly introduced subsystems
Concurrency & Async
- Blocking synchronous operations on hot paths (sync I/O, CPU-bound loops) in event-loop runtimes
- Race conditions around shared state (sessions, caches, file writes) without locking/serialization
- Unhandled promise rejections or fire-and-forget async work that can crash the process
- Overlapping scheduled runs: a job that may spawn a second instance before the previous finishes
Centralization Violations
- Config read directly from
process.env/ environment instead of the project's config module - Ad-hoc spawning of external CLIs or child processes outside the project's designated wrapper
- Direct filesystem access that bypasses the project's I/O helper module
- Logging via
console.*instead of the project's logger
Error Propagation & Isolation
- Errors in one subsystem cascading to crash unrelated subsystems
- Missing isolation around scheduled/background jobs (one failure should not take out the others)
- Silent catches that swallow errors without logging or surfacing them
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 95 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 1414abe5c0df
architecture-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository michaelcjoseph/agent-coding-setup (2 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 818 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
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…