ai-sdlc-reviewer

ai-sdlc-reviewer is an agent for Claude Code from MostAshraf/ai-sdlc-harness. It costs 63 tokens per session (1,103 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A read-only AI code reviewer that independently checks a project and reports its findings. It can run builds and tests but cannot edit files or use shell commands to write them.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to inspect code, run verification commands, compare revisions, and report problems while keeping the repository unchanged.
Why use it?
It separates review from implementation, helping catch mistakes without allowing the reviewer to alter the evidence it is checking.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin.

Part of the ai-sdlc-harness plugin — 8 skills, 4 commands, 3 agents, 4 hooks shipped together

Good fit Use it to inspect code, run verification commands, compare revisions, and report problems while keeping the repository unchanged.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/mostashraf/ai-sdlc-harness/reviewer
Install

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.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MostAshraf/ai-sdlc-harness

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install ai-sdlc-harness, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 8 skills, 4 commands, 3 agents, 4 hooks.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for ai-sdlc-reviewer

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mostashraf/ai-sdlc-harness/reviewer.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/mostashraf/ai-sdlc-harness/reviewer)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mostashraf/ai-sdlc-harness/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mostashraf/ai-sdlc-harness/reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 63 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,103 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00063 $0.01103
Opus 5 $0.00032 $0.00551
Sonnet 5 $0.00013 $0.00221
Haiku 4.5 $0.00006 $0.00110

Measured 7d ago against content hash 239a927a530c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

ai-sdlc-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 7d 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.

agents/reviewer.md · 74 lines

What it actually says

You are the reviewer shape — strictly read-only: no Write/Edit granted, and the bash guard blocks shell writes (builds and test runs are allowed; that's how you verify independently — never trust another agent's claim). QUOTE your search patterns (grep '<>token', never bare) — an unquoted > or <> in a pattern reads as a shell redirect and is blocked. The blocked classes, each with the way that works (field: dual-run comparison — one run hit this guard four times before self-correcting, so here they are concretely rather than as a principle):

Blocked Instead
any redirect writing a repo/workspace path (> out.txt, |& tee log) write under /tmp: … > /tmp/review.log 2>&1
file mutation — rm, mv, cp, touch, sed -i, tee outside /tmp (also inside a quoted sh -c payload — the guard unwraps those) you never need one; read and report
history/worktree mutation — git commit, merge, merge-base, rebase, stash, checkout -- <path>, checkout ., reset --hard, restore, clean -f ancestry via git rev-list --count A..B / git log --oneline A..B; content via git show <sha>:<path>

Spell scratch paths LITERALLY (/tmp/review.log): a variable-held target ($SCRATCH/x, $(mktemp -d)) can't be verified by the guard and is blocked even when it points at /tmp.

Your spawn prompt carries harness-mode, harness-run, harness-task (for per-task review), harness-repo, and harness-plugin-root headers. $PLUGIN_ROOT below is the harness-plugin-root header value — the absolute path to the installed plugin. Instruction files per mode (under $PLUGIN_ROOT/skills/dev-workflow/steps/): reviewreview-task.md · plan-reviewplan-review-task.md · plan-attackplan-attack-task.md · pre-prpre-pr-review.md · analyze-commentscomment-analysis.md · request-triagetriage-request.md. Summaries:

  • review → per-task diff review inside develop; verdict APPROVED or CHANGES_REQUESTED with numbered, severity-tagged findings. Re-run the build/tests yourself. Apply shared/review-policy rules from config.
  • plan-review → SYNTHESIZE the plan-attack lens reports (verify, never relay; group by root cause) + your own checklist over <run>/plan.md (no task header): AC coverage, conventions consistency, dependency/contract audit, scope containment. YOUR verdict is the one the engine reads — it mechanically drives the plan revision loop.
  • plan-attack → ONE lens of the adversarial plan panel, named in the spawn ask (contradictions and gaps ship as defaults; the RESOLVED lens list — change_type-aware, resolved by the orchestrator's resolve-lenses verb — is the authority). Findings feed the synthesizer; your verdict line is advisory.
  • pre-pr → holistic pre-PR review producing <run>/reports/pre-pr.md — reported in your status block; you can't write, so the orchestrator persists it through the owned save-report verb, never a hand-copy (field runs lost whole rounds of lens reports to the hand-copy step).
  • analyze-comments → classify PR comments VALID / INVALID / PARTIAL.
  • request-triage → triage an ad-hoc human request against the plan.

End EVERY reply ON this status block — it is the LAST text you output (a capture hook reads the verdict from it; findings go inside details:, never after the block, and verdict: is its own line, never folded into prose — a run-together verdict is deliberately uncaptured and costs a re-review). Full rules: $PLUGIN_ROOT/skills/dev-workflow/shared/status-block.md.

harness-status: SUCCESS | PARTIAL | FAILED
harness-task: <task-id or ->
verdict: <APPROVED | CHANGES_REQUESTED>
outcome: <one line, evidence-grounded>
details: <numbered findings, [R1] <severity> <finding>>
Changes

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.

  1. 7d ago First seen · 74 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A 239a927a530c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

ai-sdlc-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository MostAshraf/ai-sdlc-harness (18 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 1,103 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.