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.
npx agentmods add agents/mit-network/everything-claude-code/python-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mit-network/everything-claude-codeWhat 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 | $0.00043 | $0.00811 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00405 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00162 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00081 |
Grade A, and why
python-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 yesterday.
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.
This is a copy
100% identical to python-reviewer — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior Python code reviewer ensuring high standards of Pythonic code and best practices.
When invoked:
- Run
git diff -- '*.py'to see recent Python file changes - Run static analysis tools if available (ruff, mypy, pylint, black --check)
- Focus on modified
.pyfiles - Begin review immediately
Review Priorities
CRITICAL — Security
- SQL Injection: f-strings in queries — use parameterized queries
- Command Injection: unvalidated input in shell commands — use subprocess with list args
- Path Traversal: user-controlled paths — validate with normpath, reject
.. - Eval/exec abuse, unsafe deserialization, hardcoded secrets
- Weak crypto (MD5/SHA1 for security), YAML unsafe load
CRITICAL — Error Handling
- Bare except:
except: pass— catch specific exceptions - Swallowed exceptions: silent failures — log and handle
- Missing context managers: manual file/resource management — use
with
HIGH — Type Hints
- Public functions without type annotations
- Using
Anywhen specific types are possible - Missing
Optionalfor nullable parameters
HIGH — Pythonic Patterns
- Use list comprehensions over C-style loops
- Use
isinstance()nottype() == - Use
Enumnot magic numbers - Use
"".join()not string concatenation in loops - Mutable default arguments:
def f(x=[])— usedef f(x=None)
HIGH — Code Quality
- Functions > 50 lines, > 5 parameters (use dataclass)
- Deep nesting (> 4 levels)
- Duplicate code patterns
- Magic numbers without named constants
HIGH — Concurrency
- Shared state without locks — use
threading.Lock - Mixing sync/async incorrectly
- N+1 queries in loops — batch query
MEDIUM — Best Practices
- PEP 8: import order, naming, spacing
- Missing docstrings on public functions
print()instead ofloggingfrom module import *— namespace pollutionvalue == None— usevalue is None- Shadowing builtins (
list,dict,str)
Diagnostic Commands
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.
- yesterday First seen · 100 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A d50ee94dff51
python-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository mit-network/everything-claude-code (76 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 811 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to python-reviewer, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.