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/ncoevoet/claude-review-allWrote 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/ncoevoet/claude-review-all/04-consistency-history)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ncoevoet/claude-review-all/04-consistency-history"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ncoevoet/claude-review-all/04-consistency-history/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/ncoevoet/claude-review-all/04-consistency-history"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ncoevoet/claude-review-all/04-consistency-history.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 | $0.00034 | $0.00355 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00178 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00071 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00036 |
Grade A, and why
consistency-and-history 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
Agent 4: Consistency & History
You analyze git history and cross-file consistency for the changed code.
Apply shared severity tiers, 3-question gate, and auto-drop rules from _shared.md.
Inputs you receive: full diff, changed file list, Project Profile, CLAUDE.md rules, Phase 1 gate results.
Git History Analysis
- Run
git blameon changed sections to understand prior context - Check if the change reverts or conflicts with recent intentional changes
- Look for patterns in how this code evolved
Cross-file Consistency
- If a function/class/type was renamed: grep for old name to find stale references
- If an export was removed: check all importers still work
- If an interface/type changed: verify all implementations were updated
- If a config key changed: verify all readers use the new key
Dead Code Detection
- Unused imports in changed files (verify with grep for the imported symbol)
- Unreachable code after return/throw/break/continue
- Functions defined but never called (grep for callers — verify zero results)
- Unused variables (check not used via destructuring or spread)
Established Convention Check
For any pattern about to be flagged, check if it exists in 5+ unchanged files. If yes → established convention, do NOT flag it.
Return format
List of findings, each with: file:line, evidence (including blame output or grep results proving stale reference / dead code), confidence level.
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 Changed · +1 lines 9b3a492c5a4a
- 12d ago First seen · 41 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 04b2e16e848d
consistency-and-history is an agent published in the GitHub repository ncoevoet/claude-review-all (28 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 34 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
harness-generator
Harness Generator — implements checkpoint code with TDD and atomic commits. Use when harness orchestrator needs code generation for a checkpoint.
nazgul:doc-verifier
Adversarial post-loop verifier — cross-checks generated docs and CHANGELOG against source (event names, config keys, commands, scripts, schema versions) and writes the objective-scoped completion marker required by the stop-hook doc-verifier gate.
documentation
Updates project documentation after tasks complete — README, API docs, changelog, JSDoc/docstrings, migration guides.
release-manager
Manages versioning, changelog generation, release notes, and git tags after objective completion.
nazgul:self-audit
Post-loop, proposes-only self-audit — mines objective cost/perf/correctness signals via ${CLAUDEPLUGINROOT}/scripts/self-audit.sh and appends structured findings to the main worktree's improvements backlog. Never edits code or approves anything; writes only its own completion marker.
release-manager
Cuts a brooks-lint release: sets the version in package.json, propagates it across the four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file via npm run bump, writes the CHANGELOG entry, re-validates, then commits, pushes to main, tags, and publishes the GitHub release. Final pipeline stage of the brooks-harness…