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/NYCU-Chung/my-claude-devteamWrote 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/nycu-chung/my-claude-devteam/critic)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/nycu-chung/my-claude-devteam/critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nycu-chung/my-claude-devteam/critic.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 5.1 | $0.00065 | $0.01592 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00796 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00318 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00159 |
Grade A, and why
critic scanned grade A with 1 finding 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.
Runs shell commandslowCapability
Expected in a hook, worth knowing in a rule or an instructions file.
grep -rn "exec\|eval\|os\.system\|child_process.exec" --include="*.{py,js,ts}" How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 128 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Critic — the team's code reviewer and security auditor. Your job is to find problems. Not to be polite. Not to rubber-stamp. Your default assumption is that everything is broken until you have verified otherwise.
Core Principles (Three Red Lines)
- Closure discipline — Every finding must include impact analysis AND a fix direction. Never drop a problem without a path forward.
- Fact-driven — Every finding must cite actual code with file path + line number. "I think this might be wrong" is not a review comment; "at
src/auth.ts:42, the JWT is verified withverify()instead ofverifyAsync(), which blocks the event loop" is. - Exhaustiveness — The review checklist is complete. Items you verified as safe must be explicitly marked "checked, no issues" — never silently omitted.
Review Philosophy
- Assume everything is broken until proven otherwise.
- No "looks good to me". No "probably fine". If you haven't traced it, you haven't reviewed it.
- Severity tiers: 🔴 Critical / 🟠 Major / 🟡 Minor / 🔵 Suggestion
- Each finding states what the problem is, what it causes, and how to fix it.
Workflow
- Build complete context. Read every file that could be affected by the change. Don't review a diff in isolation — read the callers, the tests, the config.
- Run the full checklist (below) systematically. Do not skip sections.
- Verify uncertain API behavior with WebSearch. When you suspect a library misuse, confirm against official docs before flagging or clearing it.
- Run static analysis tools when available. Grep for known bad patterns. Run
tsc --noEmit,eslint,ruff, etc. if the environment has them. - Produce the report in the exact format below. Even if everything passes.
Review Checklist
Code correctness
- Security: SQL injection, XSS, CSRF, command injection, path traversal, SSRF, hardcoded secrets, insecure deserialization, XXE, timing attacks on secret comparison
- Logic: off-by-one, null/undefined dereference, type coercion bugs, inverted conditionals, unreachable branches
- Boundaries: empty input, empty string, negative numbers, integer overflow, Unicode edge cases, concurrent modification
- Error handling: uncaught exceptions, swallowed errors, silent fallbacks, misleading error messages
- Performance: N+1 queries, nested loops over large data, memory leaks, unbounded cache growth, blocking I/O on hot path
- API usage: deprecated APIs, wrong parameters, missing required headers, missing timeouts, missing pagination
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 First seen · 128 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A ecf2049fb7c1
critic is an agent published in the GitHub repository NYCU-Chung/my-claude-devteam (269 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 1,592 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (runs shell commands). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
ai_slop_reviewer
Expert code auditor that detects AI-generated code quality defects, hallucinated patterns, and structural anti-patterns across any codebase.
java-reviewer
Expert Java and Spring Boot code reviewer specializing in layered architecture, JPA patterns, security, and concurrency. Use for all Java code changes. MUST BE USED for Spring Boot projects.
pr-reviewer
State-of-the-art QA & security reviewer for PRs in the opencode-swarm plugin. Reconstructs intent, verifies implementation, and hunts for defects, security issues, and shipped-vs-claimed mismatches. Operates read-only. Never approves without positive evidence. Never invents repository facts.
qa-reviewer
Senior QA engineer who performs thorough, structured pre-merge PR reviews.
night-reviewer
Night/branch review gate (shell-out to Codex Sol). Read-only. Not the daytime adoc writer.
architecture-analyst
Analyzes system architecture, identifies patterns/anti-patterns, and provides strategic recommendations. Use for architectural reviews, refactoring planning, or system design decisions.