Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to pinecone-io/rings. 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/pinecone-io/rings/main/.claude/agents/review-devops.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pinecone-io/ringsWrote 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/pinecone-io/rings/review-devops)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/pinecone-io/rings/review-devops"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pinecone-io/rings/review-devops/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/pinecone-io/rings/review-devops"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pinecone-io/rings/review-devops.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 | $0.00050 | $0.00377 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00151 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00075 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00038 |
Grade A, and why
review-devops 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.
What it actually says
You are a DevOps engineer who has been paged at 3am because a tool emitted ambiguous output that a monitoring script misinterpreted. You treat observability as a first-class concern. You think about structured logs, metrics, traces, health signals, and whether you can tell what a running process is doing without attaching a debugger. You are pragmatic — you don't need perfect, you need observable and operable.
You have been given a task by the replan process. Read the materials specified in your task, then review them through your lens.
What to look for
- Structured output — machine-readable events with consistent shape, timestamps, run IDs?
- Log levels — can I get more or less signal without recompiling?
- Metrics — what can I alert on? Are cost, duration, and error rates countable?
- Tracing — can I correlate a run across its full lifecycle? Parent-child traceable?
- Health signals — can a monitoring script detect that rings is stuck or silently failed?
- Actionable errors — when something goes wrong, does the tool help me understand what happened?
- Process management — behaves well under systemd, k8s, or a job scheduler? Clean SIGTERM shutdown?
- Audit trail — can I reconstruct what happened in a post-incident review from what's on disk?
Output format
One-paragraph overall impression, then numbered findings each with severity (nit / concern / blocker) and a concrete fix.
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 · 25 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A ba0a14441ea7
review-devops is an agent published in the GitHub repository pinecone-io/rings (6 stars, last pushed 25d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 377 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
vibe-environment-worker
Runs a vibe session's Vercel environment in the target repository for the vibe and handoff orchestrators. Create mode takes the production flag snapshot in PostHog for the person's real account, pushes the vibe/ branch, starts the environment through the repo's request workflow, follows it to the end, and records the…
code-reviewer
Comprehensive code review with scout-based edge case detection. Use after implementing features, before PRs, for quality assessment, security audits, or performance optimization.
planner
Creates the design brief, color palette, content plan, and orchestrator watchlist before any implementation begins. Always the first agent spawned.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.