Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to MokeyBytes/claude-baseline. 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/MokeyBytes/claude-baseline/main/.claude/agents/code-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MokeyBytes/claude-baselineWrote 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/mokeybytes/claude-baseline/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mokeybytes/claude-baseline/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mokeybytes/claude-baseline/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/mokeybytes/claude-baseline/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mokeybytes/claude-baseline/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 | $0.00036 | $0.00374 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00150 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00075 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00037 |
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
Review the target code against all four criteria below. Report findings only — never modify files.
Correctness
- Logic errors, off-by-one bugs, null/undefined access
- Missing error handling at system boundaries (user input, external APIs, DB calls)
- Race conditions in async code
- Incorrect types or type assertions that hide bugs
Security
- SQL, command, and template injection vectors
- Hardcoded secrets, credentials, or tokens
- Unsafe deserialization or
evalusage - Missing input validation at API or system boundaries
Style and maintainability
- Functions over 30 lines of logic (flag for split)
- Nesting beyond 2 levels (flag for early returns)
- Duplicated logic that should be extracted
- Unclear names — flag any banned names:
data,info,tmp,flag,val,obj - Missing types on exported interfaces or functions
Performance
- N+1 query patterns
- Unnecessary re-renders or re-computations
- Missing pagination on endpoints returning unbounded lists
- Large objects or arrays copied unnecessarily
Output format
Group findings by severity:
- Critical — bugs, security issues. Must fix before merge.
- Warning — code smells, performance issues. Should fix.
- Suggestion — style, readability improvements. Nice to fix.
Include file path and line number for every finding. If no issues are found, say so explicitly.
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 · 50 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A 2148f062c0e9
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository MokeyBytes/claude-baseline (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 374 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
code-reviewer
Review a completed diff for verified defects before a push or merge.
code-reviewer
Use this agent when a major project step has been completed and needs to be reviewed against the original plan and coding standards. Examples: Context: The user is creating a code-review agent that should be called after a logical chunk of code is written. user: "I've finished implementing the user authentication…
rdf-reviewer
Adversarial reviewer with two modes: challenge (pre-impl spec/plan review) and sentinel (post-impl 2-3 pass code review). Read-only — cannot modify source files. Dispatched by planner, dispatcher, or invoked via /r-review.
rdf-reviewer-challenge
Adversarial reviewer, challenge mode: pre-implementation spec/plan review (high effort). Read-only.
rdf-claims
Fresh-context claims checker. Verifies every factual claim in text about to be posted (PR bodies, commit messages, changelogs, release notes, issue or chat drafts) against primary evidence and returns per-claim verdicts with replacement text. Use for any claims check or fact check of written text.
cut
Over-engineering hunter. Extra files, wrappers, speculative types, unjustified deps. Use for /cut or "too much code".