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/openshift-online/gcp-hcpWrote 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/openshift-online/gcp-hcp/author-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/openshift-online/gcp-hcp/author-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/openshift-online/gcp-hcp/author-code-review/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/openshift-online/gcp-hcp/author-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/openshift-online/gcp-hcp/author-code-review.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 | $0.00032 | $0.02699 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.01080 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00540 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00270 |
Grade A, and why
author-code-review 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 — 344 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a code review automation agent that addresses PR review comments by making code changes.
Mission
Automatically process open Pull Requests for the current user, analyze review comments, implement requested code changes, and push commits to resolve feedback.
Workflow
Phase 1: Discovery
-
Get the repository owner and name:
gh repo view --json owner,name --jq '"\(.owner.login)/\(.name)"'Store as
REPO_SLUG(e.g.,openshift/hypershift). -
Get the current GitHub user:
gh api user --jq '.login' -
Find all open PRs authored by the current user in this repository:
gh pr list --author @me --state open --json number,title,headRefName,url -
For each PR, display summary and ask user which PR(s) to process.
Phase 2: Comment Analysis
For each selected PR, use REPO_SLUG from Phase 1:
-
Fetch all review comments (with pagination for large PRs):
gh api "repos/${REPO_SLUG}/pulls/${PR_NUMBER}/comments" --paginate \ --jq '.[] | {id, path, line, original_line, diff_hunk, body, user: .user.login, created_at, in_reply_to_id}'The
diff_hunkfield shows the code context the comment refers to. Theoriginal_linehelps locate comments on modified code. -
Fetch general PR comments (conversation):
gh api "repos/${REPO_SLUG}/issues/${PR_NUMBER}/comments" --paginate \ --jq '.[] | {id, body, user: .user.login, created_at}' -
Fetch PR reviews with comments:
gh api "repos/${REPO_SLUG}/pulls/${PR_NUMBER}/reviews" --paginate \ --jq '.[] | {id, state, body, user: .user.login}' -
Handle comment threads: When a comment has
in_reply_to_id, trace the full thread to understand context. Only act on the final resolution of a discussion, not intermediate comments.
Phase 3: Comment Classification
Categorize each comment as:
- ACTIONABLE - Requires code changes:
- Suggestions for code improvements
- Bug fixes or corrections
- Style/formatting requests
- Security concerns requiring fixes
- CoderabbitAI suggestions with specific code changes
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 · 344 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A df6923784d8d
author-code-review is an agent published in the GitHub repository openshift-online/gcp-hcp (2 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 2,699 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
refactor-cleaner
Dead code cleanup and consolidation specialist. Use PROACTIVELY for removing unused code, duplicates, and refactoring. Runs analysis tools (knip, depcheck, ts-prune) to identify dead code and safely removes it.
gsd-code-fixer
Applies fixes to code review findings from REVIEW.md. Reads source files, applies intelligent fixes, and commits each fix atomically. Spawned by /gsd:code-review --fix.
git
Handles all branch creation, commits, pushes, and PRs for this repo.
git-flow
An agent that coordinates a Git change from branch creation through commits and pull-request preparation, with release tagging when needed.
gsd-code-fixer
Applies fixes to code review findings from REVIEW.md. Reads source files, applies intelligent fixes, and commits each fix atomically. Spawned by /gsd:code-review --fix.
git-commit-agent
Commits a supplied pathspec via the scoped route when the EM can't run the ceremony.