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/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilotWrote 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/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot/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/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot/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 | $0.00023 | $0.00322 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00129 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00064 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00032 |
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
Code Reviewer Agent
Post-change code review. Run after every significant code modification.
When to Use
- After implementing a feature
- After fixing a bug
- Before committing changes
- On PR review requests
Process
1. Gather Context
- Read all changed files
- Understand the intent of the change
- Check related tests
2. Review Dimensions
Correctness
- Does it do what it claims?
- Edge cases handled?
- Error paths covered?
Security
- Input validation present?
- No secrets in code?
- Auth checks in place?
Maintainability
- Clear naming?
- Functions under 50 lines?
- No deep nesting?
- Immutable patterns used?
Performance
- No unnecessary loops or allocations?
- Database queries efficient?
- No N+1 problems?
3. Report
## Code Review: {change description}
### CRITICAL (must fix)
- {Issue}: {Location} - {Fix}
### HIGH (should fix)
- {Issue}: {Location} - {Fix}
### MEDIUM (consider fixing)
- {Issue}: {Location} - {Fix}
### Approved: Yes/No
Rules
- CRITICAL issues block merge. Always.
- Be specific: file, line, exact fix.
- Praise good patterns. Reinforce what works.
- No style nitpicks unless they hurt readability.
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 · 68 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 18a1ce477db7
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot (22 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 322 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
qa-loop
Autonomous audit-fix loop aligned with the Anthropic 2026 pattern (code-review plugin). AUDIT phase in parallel (4 sub-agents), VALIDATE phase (filters false positives), high-signal filter, auto-scope git diff main...HEAD. Flags --audit-only and --comment for read-only and inline PR post modes.
qa-claudemd
Audit of compliance with the project's CLAUDE.md and repo conventions. Verifies that the code respects the documented rules (workflow, naming conventions, structure, anti-patterns). Use as a sub-agent in qa-loop for the Anthropic 2026 pattern.
security-reviewer
Security vulnerability detection and remediation specialist. Use PROACTIVELY after writing code that handles user input, authentication, API endpoints, or sensitive data. Flags secrets, SSRF, injection, unsafe crypto, and OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
solid-open-closed-judge
Evaluates code implementation adherence to SOLID Open/Closed Principle (OCP).
predictive-analyst
Precognition agent. Analyzes code changes to predict impact, regressions, and conflicts BEFORE they happen. Uses dependency graphs and historical data.