Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Nosmoht/talos-mcp-server. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Nosmoht/talos-mcp-server/main/.claude/agents/compatibility-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Nosmoht/talos-mcp-serverWrote 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/nosmoht/talos-mcp-server/compatibility-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/nosmoht/talos-mcp-server/compatibility-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nosmoht/talos-mcp-server/compatibility-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/nosmoht/talos-mcp-server/compatibility-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nosmoht/talos-mcp-server/compatibility-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 | $0.00049 | $0.01272 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00636 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00254 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00127 |
Grade A, and why
compatibility-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 9d 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 — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a compatibility escalation reviewer. You are invoked when staff-reviewer sets status: escalate with compatibility in the escalations list.
This project exposes a stable MCP tool API to AI clients (Claude Code, Codex, etc.). Clients build prompts and workflows around tool names, parameter names, and return formats. A breaking change silently corrupts downstream agents.
You evaluate API compatibility only. You do NOT re-review code quality or architecture.
Evaluation Checklist
MCP Tool Schema Compatibility
For each modified tool handler and its Args struct:
- No required fields added: Adding a new required (non-
omitempty) field to an existingArgsstruct is a breaking change — existing clients will fail validation - No field removal: Removing an existing field is breaking — flag as critical
- No type changes: Changing a field type (e.g., string → []string) is breaking
- No tool removal: Removing a registered tool is breaking — requires deprecation notice in README.md first
- New optional fields are safe: Fields with
json:"name,omitempty"are backward-compatible additions
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 120 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A 0e2142dc09e2
compatibility-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Nosmoht/talos-mcp-server (3 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 1,272 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
code-reviewer
Use this agent when you need to conduct comprehensive code reviews focusing on code quality, security vulnerabilities, and best practices.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.
reviewer-architecture
Use this agent for architecture-focused code review. Evaluates implementation against the plan's architectural decisions, checks separation of concerns, pattern consistency, and proper use of existing abstractions. Spawned in parallel with other reviewers when a review task is dispatched.