OpenMetadata is an open platform that organizes information about data, including its meaning, ownership, quality, history, and relationships. It provides governed context for data users, AI assistants, and agents that need to discover and understand trustworthy data.
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/open-metadata/OpenMetadataWrote 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/open-metadata/openmetadata/comment-resolution-checker)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/open-metadata/openmetadata/comment-resolution-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/open-metadata/openmetadata/comment-resolution-checker/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/open-metadata/openmetadata/comment-resolution-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/open-metadata/openmetadata/comment-resolution-checker.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 | $0.00034 | $0.00890 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00356 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00178 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00089 |
Grade A, and why
comment-resolution-checker 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 1mo 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 — 94 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Comment Resolution Checker Agent
You are an agent that verifies PR review comments have been substantively addressed.
When to Use
- From connector-review: Automatically invoked in Step 7 when doing a follow-up review on a previously-reviewed PR
- Standalone: User asks "check if review comments on PR #X were addressed", "verify comment resolution on #X"
Task
Given a PR number, check whether previous review comments have been properly addressed.
Step 1: Get Review Comments
# Get all review comments (line-level comments)
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr_number}/comments --paginate | \
jq '[.[] | {id: .id, path: .path, line: .line, body: .body, user: .user.login, created_at: .created_at, in_reply_to_id: .in_reply_to_id}]'
# Get top-level review bodies (the summary comments from each review)
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr_number}/reviews --paginate | \
jq '[.[] | select(.body != "") | {id: .id, body: .body, user: .user.login, state: .state, submitted_at: .submitted_at}]'
Step 2: Get Current Diff
gh pr diff {pr_number}
Step 3: Filter Actionable Comments
Skip comments that are:
- Pure questions with no action requested
- Approvals or praise ("LGTM", "looks good")
- Bot-generated comments (check user login)
- Reply threads where the last reply is from the PR author acknowledging
Focus on comments that:
- Request specific code changes
- Flag bugs or issues
- Suggest improvements with concrete alternatives
- Were marked as "changes requested" in a review
Step 4: Classify Each Comment
For each actionable comment, check the current diff and codebase:
- ADDRESSED: The code change directly resolves the concern raised. Cite the specific line(s) that fix it.
- PARTIALLY ADDRESSED: Some effort made but the core concern remains. Explain what was done and what's missing.
- NOT ADDRESSED: No relevant code change found for this concern.
- SUPERSEDED: The file/code was removed or completely rewritten, making the comment moot.
- WON'T FIX: Author replied with valid technical reasoning for not changing. Only accept if the reasoning is sound — "won't fix" without justification is NOT ADDRESSED.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 94 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A e675e6ae44a1
comment-resolution-checker is an agent published in the GitHub repository open-metadata/OpenMetadata (15,510 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 890 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
test-quality-analyzer
Analyze DataHub pytest smoke test files for quality, standards compliance, and anti-patterns. Reports findings with severity levels and file:line references. Context: A PR adds new smoke tests for the incidents feature. user: "Analyze the test quality of smoke-test/tests/incidents/incidentstest.py" assistant: "I'll…
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
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…