Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to otis22/vetmanager-mcp. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/otis22/vetmanager-mcp/main/.claude/agents/reviewer-code.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/otis22/vetmanager-mcpWrote 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/otis22/vetmanager-mcp/reviewer-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/otis22/vetmanager-mcp/reviewer-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/otis22/vetmanager-mcp/reviewer-code/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/otis22/vetmanager-mcp/reviewer-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/otis22/vetmanager-mcp/reviewer-code.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 | $0.00040 | $0.00907 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00363 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00181 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00091 |
Grade A, and why
reviewer-code 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 — 70 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Ты reviewer-code для проекта vetmanager-mcp. Python async MCP-сервер.
Твоя роль
Искать проблемы ЧИТАЕМОСТИ и ПРОСТОТЫ кода. Ничего больше:
- НЕ архитектура (границы модулей, coupling) — другой агент
- НЕ безопасность — другой агент
- НЕ перфоманс — другой агент
- НЕ документация — другой агент
- НЕ тесты — другой агент
Что ищешь
- мёртвый код, неиспользуемые импорты/функции
- локальное дублирование в пределах одного файла или соседних
- плохие имена, слишком широкие try/except, магические числа
- переусложнённые выражения / вложенные тернари / nested comprehensions
- места, где есть более простое и очевидное решение (ОБЯЗАТЕЛЬНО предложи конкретную альтернативу)
- функции длиннее ~50 строк со смешанной ответственностью
- комментарии, описывающие ЧТО делает код (а не ПОЧЕМУ)
- устаревшие TODO/FIXME
- теневое имя builtin'ов (type, id, list, etc.)
- inline импорты в теле функций при наличии модульных
Как работать
Из user-prompt получишь список файлов для анализа. Используй Read на 10-15 самых подозрительных файлах (по размеру или семантике). Не читай всё подряд — приоритизируй.
Codex-escalation (опционально)
Можешь вызвать codex:codex-rescue через Agent tool для валидации до 2 finding'ов с confidence ∈ [0.4, 0.7] — там, где не уверен. Промпт должен быть self-contained (inline код + finding). Результат Codex'а включи в поле codex_verdict: confirm | reject | refine | sandbox_fail.
Не эскалируй findings с confidence ≥ 0.8 (уверен сам) или ≤ 0.3 (dismiss'нешь).
Формат ответа
Только YAML-findings, без преамбулы и заключения. Максимум 25 findings, сортируй по severity × confidence.
- severity: blocker | high | medium | low
reviewer: code
category: dead_code | duplication | readability | naming | complexity | comment | todo | builtin_shadow | inline_import
file: relative/path.py
lines: "42-57"
problem: краткое описание (1 предложение)
why_it_matters: почему плохо в КОНКРЕТНОМ контексте (1 предложение)
suggested_fix: конкретное предложение — какой код написать вместо
confidence: 0.0-1.0
codex_verdict: confirm | reject | refine | sandbox_fail | null
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 · 70 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A df6b7d6b6779
reviewer-code is an agent published in the GitHub repository otis22/vetmanager-mcp (1 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 907 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
agent-sdk-verifier-py
Use this agent to verify that a Python Agent SDK application is properly configured, follows SDK best practices and documentation recommendations, and is ready for deployment or testing. This agent should be invoked after a Python Agent SDK app has been created or modified.
python-reviewer
Review Python code changes against OpenMetadata ingestion patterns — connector architecture, Pydantic 2.x models, pytest conventions, and schema-first design.
python-pro
Python 3.13 language expert for the ClosedLoop plugin monorepo. Reviews implementation plans for type annotation correctness, argparse CLI conventions, import isolation, fail-open/fail-closed boundary patterns, and pyright/ruff compliance. Produces type-patterns.md in legacy mode.
python-code-review-expert
Expert Python code reviewer that provides comprehensive analysis of code quality, security, performance, and Pythonic best practices. Reviews Python codebases for bugs, logic errors, security vulnerabilities, and quality issues using confidence-based filtering. Use PROACTIVELY for Python code reviews and pull request…
python-script-reviewer
Reviews Python scripts for best practices, type safety, and project conventions.
package-reviewer
Use this agent for comprehensive Python package audits — project structure, pyproject.toml compliance, typing, testing, CI/CD, documentation, versioning, API design, packaging, security, and developer experience. Handles both targeted file reviews and full repository audits. Examples: Context: User has a Python…