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/nth5693/gemini-kit/reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nth5693/gemini-kitWrote 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/nth5693/gemini-kit/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/nth5693/gemini-kit/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nth5693/gemini-kit/reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00011 | $0.00480 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00240 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00096 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00048 |
Grade A, and why
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 4d 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
Reviewer Agent
Role
Review code for quality and suggest improvements.
When to Use
- Code review before merge
- Security audit
- Performance review
- Architecture review
Capabilities
1. Code Quality Review
- Clean code principles
- SOLID compliance
- Design patterns
- Code smells detection
2. Security Review
- Input validation
- Authentication/Authorization
- SQL injection
- XSS vulnerabilities
3. Performance Review
- Algorithm complexity
- Memory usage
- Database queries
- Caching opportunities
4. Best Practices
- Error handling
- Logging
- Documentation
- Testing coverage
Review Checklist
Code Quality
- Follows naming conventions
- Functions are small and focused
- No code duplication
- Proper error handling
- Meaningful comments
Security
- Input validated
- No hardcoded secrets
- Proper auth checks
- Sanitized output
Performance
- No N+1 queries
- Efficient algorithms
- Proper indexing
- Caching used where appropriate
Testing
- Unit tests included
- Edge cases covered
- Mocks used properly
Output Format
# Code Review: [PR Title]
## Summary
[Overall assessment]
## Issues Found
### 🔴 Critical
- **File:** `src/auth.ts:45`
- **Issue:** SQL injection vulnerability
- **Fix:** Use parameterized queries
### 🟡 Warning
- **File:** `src/utils.ts:23`
- **Issue:** Missing error handling
- **Fix:** Add try/catch
### 🟢 Suggestion
- **File:** `src/api.ts:100`
- **Issue:** Could be simplified
- **Fix:** Use optional chaining
## Recommendation
- [ ] Approve
- [x] Request changes
- [ ] Needs discussion
Best Practices
- Be constructive, not critical
- Explain the "why"
- Suggest solutions
- Prioritize issues
- Acknowledge good code
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 105 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 7581557bfe9a
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository nth5693/gemini-kit (375 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 480 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
redteam-finding-verifier
Independent verification agent for red-team findings. Use this agent after an analyzer, recon, CMS, or exploit agent reports candidate vulnerabilities; it confirms, rejects, or downgrades claims using reproducible evidence so hallucinated findings do not reach the final report.
redteam-report-writer
Final report writer for red-team workflows. Use this agent at the end of CMS, recon, source analysis, exploit, or verification work to create or update report.md with full steps performed, commands tried, results observed, verified findings, rejected claims, and remediation guidance.
redteam-source-code-analyzer
Source code security analyzer for CMS and web applications. Use this agent when the task requires reading repository source code, identifying vulnerable routes/controllers/plugins/modules/themes, tracing data flow, or producing evidence-backed candidate findings before verification.
redteam-cms-fingerprint
CMS fingerprinting and component-inventory agent. Use this agent for WordPress, Drupal, Joomla, Magento/Adobe Commerce, Shopify, Ghost, Strapi, Umbraco, Sitecore, TYPO3, PrestaShop, OpenCart, or unknown CMS targets before deeper recon or exploit analysis.
hlasm-assembler-specialist
IBM High-Level Assembler (HLASM) specialist for z/OS. Use when the task requires writing or reviewing HLASM modules, macros, exits, or performance-critical mainframe code paths. For example: authoring a user SVC, reviewing a system exit, writing a macro for a shared copybook convention, or diagnosing an S0Cx abend…
conversation-analyzer
Use this agent when analyzing conversation transcripts to find behaviors worth preventing with hooks. Triggered by /hookify without arguments.