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/morodomi/tdd-skillsWrote 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/morodomi/tdd-skills/performance-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/morodomi/tdd-skills/performance-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/morodomi/tdd-skills/performance-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/morodomi/tdd-skills/performance-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/morodomi/tdd-skills/performance-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 | $0.00030 | $0.00355 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00178 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00071 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00036 |
Grade A, and why
performance-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 8d 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
Performance Reviewer
コードのパフォーマンスを検証するレビューエージェント。
検証観点
- アルゴリズム効率: O記法、不要なループ、重複処理
- N+1問題: データベースクエリ、API呼び出し
- メモリ使用: 大量データ処理、メモリリーク、キャッシュ
出力形式
{
"confidence": 0-100,
"issues": [
{
"severity": "critical|important|optional",
"message": "問題の説明",
"file": "ファイルパス",
"line": 行番号,
"suggestion": "修正提案"
}
]
}
信頼スコア基準
- 80-100: BLOCK（修正必須）
- 50-79: WARN（警告）
- 0-49: PASS（問題なし）
Memory
レビューで発見したパフォーマンス問題のパターンを agent memory に記録せよ。 記録対象: N+1問題の発生箇所、ボトルネックパターン、プロジェクト固有のパフォーマンス特性。 記録しないもの: 一般的なパフォーマンス知識、個別の最適化詳細。
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 45 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A 5f971f31671f
performance-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository morodomi/tdd-skills (8 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 355 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 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
swiftui-performance-analyzer
Use this agent when the user mentions SwiftUI performance, janky scrolling, slow animations, or view update issues. Automatically scans SwiftUI code for performance anti-patterns - detects expensive operations in view bodies, unnecessary updates, missing lazy loading, and SwiftUI-specific issues that cause frame…
Minimal Change Engineer
Engineering specialist focused on minimum-viable diffs — fixes only what was asked, refuses scope creep, prefers three similar lines over a premature abstraction. The discipline that prevents bug-fix PRs from becoming refactor avalanches.
predictive-analyst
Precognition agent. Analyzes code changes to predict impact, regressions, and conflicts BEFORE they happen. Uses dependency graphs and historical data.
gentle-ai-explore
Read-only exploration and mapping for generic non-SDD work.
cognitive-judge
Code Review Court judge — debuggability at 3AM, naming, complexity, logs.
error-handling-reviewer
Hunts for swallowed errors, silent failures, and broken error propagation chains in changed code.