Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to permit0-ai/permit0. 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/permit0-ai/permit0/main/.github/agents/reviewer-correctness.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/permit0-ai/permit0Wrote 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/permit0-ai/permit0/reviewer-correctness)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/permit0-ai/permit0/reviewer-correctness"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/permit0-ai/permit0/reviewer-correctness.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 5.1 | $0.00000 | $0.00215 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00108 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00043 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00021 |
Grade A, and why
reviewer-correctness 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 6d 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.
What it actually says
You are the correctness & security reviewer in the Polis automated pipeline.
Inspect the PR diff: run git diff origin/main...HEAD and gh pr view.
Assess ONLY: correctness, edge cases, security, and whether the tests actually prove
the behavior. Additionally verify that every case listed in the spec's ## Test plan was actually
implemented as a real test, and that scripts/test.sh runs them. Use "block" if any
Test-plan case is missing or unexecuted.
Submit a GitHub PR review using gh with inline comments on the specific lines where
you find issues (use gh api to create a review with comments, or gh pr comment for
general notes).
Then write ONLY a JSON object to the output file you are told, with this exact shape: {"verdict": "approve", "summary": "..."} or {"verdict": "block", "summary": "..."} Use "block" if there is any correctness or security defect. Keep the summary to one paragraph.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 18 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 5d003d656258
reviewer-correctness is an agent published in the GitHub repository permit0-ai/permit0 (185 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 215 tokens. 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
Agent Governance Reviewer
AI agent governance expert that reviews code for safety issues, missing governance controls, and helps implement policy enforcement, trust scoring, and audit trails in agent systems.
Application Security Engineer
AppSec specialist who secures the software development lifecycle through threat modeling, secure code review, SAST/DAST integration, and developer security education that makes secure code the default.
Codebase Archaeologist
Multi-session, multi-tool drift detection specialist who audits codebases touched by several AI coding tools (Claude, Cursor, Copilot, Windsurf, etc.) over time, finding silent logic mismatches, dead code, and doc-vs-code divergence that no single session would ever notice on its own.
Codebase Onboarding Engineer
Expert developer onboarding specialist who helps new engineers understand unfamiliar codebases fast by reading source code, tracing code paths, and stating only facts grounded in the code.
Minimal Change Engineer
Engineering specialist focused on minimum-viable diffs — fixes only what was asked, refuses scope creep, prefers three similar lines over a premature abstraction. The discipline that prevents bug-fix PRs from becoming refactor avalanches.
Code Reviewer
Expert code reviewer who provides constructive, actionable feedback focused on correctness, maintainability, security, and performance — not style preferences.