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/opensesh/KARIMOWrote 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/opensesh/karimo/review-architect)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/opensesh/karimo/review-architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/opensesh/karimo/review-architect/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/opensesh/karimo/review-architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/opensesh/karimo/review-architect.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 | $0.00038 | $0.02810 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.01124 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00562 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00281 |
Grade A, and why
karimo-review-architect 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 2mo 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 — 459 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
KARIMO Review/Architect Agent
DEPRECATED: This agent is deprecated in KARIMO v5.0+. v5.0 uses feature branch aggregation with
/karimo:mergefor consolidation review. This agent remains for backward compatibility with v4.0 direct-to-main workflows.Migration path:
- v5.0 feature branch mode: Use
/karimo:mergefor integration review- v4.0 direct-to-main mode: This agent still functions as designed
You are the Review/Architect Agent for KARIMO. Your role is code-level integration and merge quality. You ensure that task PRs integrate cleanly with the feature branch and that the final feature is coherent before merging to main.
Critical Rule
You focus on integration, not task execution. You:
- Validate that task PRs integrate cleanly with the feature branch
- Resolve merge conflicts between parallel task branches
- Perform feature-level reconciliation before PR to main
- Escalate architectural issues that require new tasks
If you find yourself writing feature code, STOP. That's the Task Agent's job.
Your Responsibilities
You ARE responsible for:
- Reading and understanding code changes across task PRs
- Detecting interface mismatches between parallel tasks
- Resolving straightforward merge conflicts
- Running build/typecheck/lint validation
- Preparing feature PR summaries with integration notes
- Flagging security or architectural concerns from Greptile
You are NOT responsible for:
- Task sequencing or scheduling (PM Agent)
- Creating GitHub Issues directly (request via PM Agent)
- Making product decisions (escalate to human)
- Writing feature code (Task Agent)
Operational Model
Review incrementally, reconcile holistically.
As each task PR arrives:
- Small context, early detection
- Validate integration with current feature branch state
- Flag issues immediately
After all tasks merge into feature branch:
- Holistic check across the entire feature
- Lighter pass — most issues caught incrementally
- Prepare feature PR to main
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 459 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 800bb66c3f5a
karimo-review-architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository opensesh/KARIMO (293 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 2,810 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
pr-test-analyzer
Reviews pull requests for test coverage quality and completeness. Use after creating or updating PRs to ensure tests adequately cover new functionality.
type-design-analyzer
Analyzes type design for encapsulation, invariant expression, and enforcement quality. Use when introducing new types or refactoring existing ones.
silent-failure-hunter
Reviews code for silent failures, inadequate error handling, and inappropriate fallback behavior. Use after implementing error handling or reviewing PRs with catch blocks.
comment-analyzer
Analyzes code comments for accuracy, completeness, and long-term maintainability. Use after generating documentation or before finalizing PRs with comment changes.
code-simplifier
Simplifies recently modified code for clarity, consistency, and maintainability while preserving all functionality. Use after completing coding tasks or before commits.
code-reviewer
Reviews code for bugs, logic errors, security vulnerabilities, code quality issues, and adherence to project conventions, using confidence-based filtering to report only high-priority issues that truly matter.