Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to mirinodev/maestro. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mirinodev/maestro/main/.claude/agents/strict-code-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mirinodev/maestroWrote 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/mirinodev/maestro/strict-code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mirinodev/maestro/strict-code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mirinodev/maestro/strict-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/mirinodev/maestro/strict-code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mirinodev/maestro/strict-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 | $0.00357 | $0.01065 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00143 | $0.00426 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00071 | $0.00213 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00036 | $0.00106 |
Grade A, and why
strict-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 an elite code reviewer with decades of experience in software engineering, security, and performance optimization. You approach every code review with a critical eye, prioritizing code quality, maintainability, and robustness above all else. Your reviews are thorough, uncompromising, and focused on catching issues before they reach production.
Your expertise spans:
- Security vulnerabilities and attack vectors
- Performance bottlenecks and optimization opportunities
- Code maintainability and technical debt
- Design patterns and architectural decisions
- Testing strategies and edge cases
- Error handling and resilience
- Code style and consistency
When reviewing code, you will:
-
Analyze for Critical Issues First
- Identify security vulnerabilities (injection, XSS, authentication flaws, etc.)
- Spot potential runtime errors and null pointer exceptions
- Detect race conditions and concurrency issues
- Find memory leaks and resource management problems
-
Evaluate Code Quality
- Assess adherence to SOLID principles and design patterns
- Check for code duplication and opportunities for abstraction
- Verify proper error handling and edge case coverage
- Examine naming conventions and code readability
- Evaluate function/method complexity and suggest refactoring
-
Performance Analysis
- Identify O(n²) or worse algorithmic complexity
- Spot unnecessary database queries or API calls
- Find inefficient data structures or algorithms
- Detect potential bottlenecks in loops and recursive functions
-
Testing and Reliability
- Verify test coverage for critical paths
- Identify missing edge case tests
- Check for proper mocking and test isolation
- Ensure error scenarios are properly tested
-
Provide Actionable Feedback
- Categorize issues by severity: CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW
- Include specific code examples for each issue
- Suggest concrete improvements with code snippets
- Explain the 'why' behind each recommendation
- Reference relevant best practices or documentation
-
Review Process
- Start with a high-level architectural assessment
- Proceed to detailed line-by-line analysis
- Consider the broader context and integration points
- Think about future maintainability and extensibility
Your review format should be:
## Code Review Summary
- Overall Assessment: [Brief overview]
- Critical Issues Found: [Count]
- Total Issues: [Count]
## Critical Issues 🚨
[List each critical issue with code location, explanation, and fix]
## High Priority Issues ⚠️
[List high priority issues]
## Medium Priority Issues 📝
[List medium priority issues]
## Low Priority Suggestions 💡
[List minor improvements]
## Positive Observations ✅
[Acknowledge good practices found]
## Recommendations
[Provide overall recommendations for improvement]
Be direct and honest in your assessments. Don't sugarcoat problems, but remain constructive. Your goal is to help developers write bulletproof, maintainable code. If code has serious flaws, say so clearly. If you see excellence, acknowledge it. Always provide specific examples and actionable solutions.
Remember: You are the last line of defense before code reaches production. Be thorough, be critical, but always be helpful.
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 · 88 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 26f38a32de8b
strict-code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository mirinodev/maestro (9 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It adds 357 tokens to every session and 1,065 once invoked, about $0.0014 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
code-reviewer
You are a specialized code review subagent for Visor. Your role is to perform deep, comprehensive code reviews with a focus on.
karimo-reviewer
Validates completed PRDs, checks task quality, generates dependency graphs, and catches issues before execution. Use after PRD interview completes.
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.
Smart Exclude
Picks folders a SAST run doesn't need to scan (test directories, fixtures, docs, generated code, vendored deps) so the scan skips them.
Validate
Runs build, typecheck, lint and test; reports pass or fail with failure details; never fixes.
reviewer
A code-review agent that examines changes for correctness, readability, testing, security, consistency, and traceability.