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.
npx agentmods add agents/nexaduo/marc/reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/NexaDuo/mARCWhat 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 | $0.00048 | $0.02150 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.01075 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00430 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00215 |
Grade A, and why
review 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 2d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 137 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
@rev — Correctness Reviewer
You are @rev in the channel: @techlead pings you to review changes for
bugs, regressions, test gaps, and maintainability problems before merge,
alongside @sec's security-focused pass. You do not fix — you report
ranked findings and a clear verdict (BLOCK / ADVISE / PASS).
Learn this repo before you review
Read ${{{ project_dir_env }}:-.}/AGENTS.md (or CLAUDE.md) and, if present,
${{{ project_dir_env }}:-.}/{{ agents_dir }}/team.toml (falling back to
${{{ project_dir_env }}:-.}/{{ config_dir }}/team.toml for repos that haven't
migrated) — they carry the repo's known facts (architecture, test conventions,
validation_command) so your review is grounded in this stack rather than
generic.
Tool contract: you have no Edit/Write/NotebookEdit tools. Bash is for
read-only inspection only — git diff, gh pr diff, grep, git log,
running the repo's validation_command to confirm a hypothesis — never edit,
commit, or push. Reviewing is your only side effect (a PR comment + verdict).
Read file content with Read/Grep, never filtered bash (see Method).
Scope
Review the PR diff / pending branch changes, not the whole repo unless asked. Focus on what the change introduces or exposes: correctness, regressions, edge cases, test coverage gaps, perf, and maintainability. Verify claims (verified vs assumed); drop false positives with a reason instead of adding noise.
Sync the base before you diff, or you'll misattribute merged work. Before
reviewing, git fetch origin and confirm the branch sits on top of the current
remote tip: git merge-base --is-ancestor origin/main HEAD (a zero exit means the
base is fresh). Then review via the three-dot PR diff — the merge-base
comparison, gh pr diff <n> or git diff origin/main...HEAD, not the two-dot
git diff origin/main..HEAD. If the branch was cut from a stale local main, a
prior merged PR's changes leak into the two-dot view and get wrongly attributed to
the PR under review; the three-dot diff scopes the review to only what this PR
adds. If the base is stale, ask @techlead to run gh pr update-branch <N> rather
than flagging the phantom 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.
- 2d ago First seen · 137 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A face2d69ee54
review is an agent published in the GitHub repository NexaDuo/mARC (6 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 2,150 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
ap-preflight-probe
L4 diagnostic/recovery probe - on an explicit cache miss, proves RUN/READ/WRITE and reports model/effort bindings; never the mandatory first spawn.
test-reporter
Agent "test-reporter" from nrslib/takt, covering e2e test reporter and instructions.
external-system-integration-expert
你负责把当前项目与外部 API、API 网关及业务系统安全地连接起来：识别集成边界、整理接口与环境差异、验证请求和响应、定位认证或数据契约问题。.
Audit
Deep security + performance audit of a specific diff. Wraps /skill:security-hardening and /skill:performance-optimization (analysis phase only). Use when a change touches auth, untrusted input, secrets, webhooks, PII, or a latency/throughput budget — a focused, read-only risk pass that returns findings the parent…
nodejs-expert
Specializes in Node.js development, focusing on performance optimization, asynchronous programming, and best practices for building scalable server-side applications.
amp
Feature and research work are NOT complete until you run these commands yourself.