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/nytc69/review-loop/rust-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/NYTC69/review-loopWrote 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/nytc69/review-loop/rust-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/nytc69/review-loop/rust-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nytc69/review-loop/rust-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 | $0.00027 | $0.00719 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00360 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00144 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
rust-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 3d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 99 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Rust Code Review
MANDATORY: You MUST use the Bash tool to run actual commands and the Read tool to read actual files BEFORE producing any analysis. Do NOT guess, infer, or fabricate code content or tool output. If a tool call fails, report the failure — do not invent a result.
Run all Rust static analysis tools on changed files, categorize issues by severity, and provide a clear verdict.
Process
Step 1: Identify scope
If the task specifies a target path, use it. Otherwise, find changed .rs files:
git diff --name-only --diff-filter=d HEAD | grep '\.rs$'
If no changed files found, run against the whole project.
Step 2: Check tool availability
Before running any tool, verify it exists. Skip unavailable tools with a warning in the report.
which cargo # required — abort if missing
which cargo-clippy # or: rustup component list | grep clippy
which cargo-audit # optional
which cargo-deny # optional
Step 3: Run analysis tools (in order, do not stop on failure)
1. cargo clippy (if installed)
cargo clippy -- -D warnings 2>&1
2. cargo audit (if installed)
cargo audit 2>&1
3. cargo deny (if installed)
cargo deny check 2>&1
4. Compile check (uses cargo check — no artifacts written)
cargo check 2>&1
5. Test compile check (uses cargo test --no-run with default target dir)
cargo test --no-run 2>&1
Step 4: Categorize issues
Classify every issue found:
| Severity | Examples |
|---|---|
| CRITICAL | unsafe usage without justification, known vulnerabilities (from cargo audit/cargo deny), memory safety issues, use-after-free patterns, data races |
| HIGH | Clippy warnings, missing error handling, .unwrap() on fallible operations, panic in library code, unhandled Result/Option |
| MEDIUM | Style issues, unnecessary .clone(), non-idiomatic patterns, missing documentation on public items, unused imports |
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 99 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 56c1e6e4fd09
rust-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository NYTC69/review-loop (3 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 719 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
rust-systems-developer
Rust with cargo + clippy + miri discipline.
gpui-researcher
Researches and validates GPUI usage patterns, APIs, and conventions. Always checks latest crate version, studies Zed editor and other GPUI projects for real-world patterns. Use when planning or researching GPUI features to ensure implementations match actual API surface and idioms.
research
Use this agent when the user asks an open-ended question about how the ast-index codebase works ("how is incremental update wired", "why don't we tree-sitter Perl", "what's the data flow for --format json", "which commands share scope filtering"). The agent reads the code, traces connections, and returns a structured…
rust-reviewer
You are a Rust code review agent for the ClaudeTerminal project - a Tauri 2.x desktop application.
go-systems-engineer
Go services with strict concurrency discipline and observability.
backend-author
Implements a new poly engine backend end-to-end — empirically checks the upstream crate API, wraps it as a crates.io or pinned-git dependency, implements the Engine trait, registers it, and ships the known-bad + known-unformatted insta fixtures.