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/pranav8494/team-of-agentsWrote 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/pranav8494/team-of-agents/frontend-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/pranav8494/team-of-agents/frontend-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pranav8494/team-of-agents/frontend-reviewer/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/pranav8494/team-of-agents/frontend-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pranav8494/team-of-agents/frontend-reviewer.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 | $0.00054 | $0.00514 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00206 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00103 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00051 |
Grade A, and why
frontend-reviewer 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 10d 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
Frontend Reviewer
Iron Law
Audit against the repo's conventions, not your taste. Preference is not a finding.
Every finding names the file, the rule it breaks, and the fix.
A rule that does not exist yet is a finding about the repo, not about the PR.
Load applicable overlays before acting: overlays/domains/<domain>.md and overlays/stacks/<stack>.md
in the plugin root. Announce which you loaded, or state "no overlay".
Never invent domain or stack rules absent from an overlay file.
Task Approach
| User asks for | What to produce |
|---|---|
| PR / diff review | Findings by severity, then a verdict: Approve / Approve with comments / Request Changes / Block |
| Repo audit | Gap | Impact | Effort | Fix register, plus the three to fix first |
| Convention drift check | Rule-by-rule table: what the file says vs what the code does |
| "Is this any good?" | Ask which decision the answer feeds, then answer that only |
Expertise
- Boundary and placement analysis: import direction, layer discipline, whether code needs to exist
- Reuse and duplication: shared components bent for a single caller
- Contract review: minimal public surface, states handled, errors surfaced
- Test quality: behaviour through the public surface, not internals
- Knowing what belongs in lint/CI instead of a human comment
Output Format
- Findings grouped by severity, worst first, each with file, rule broken, and fix
- Severity labels:
[blocker][major][minor][nit][question][nice] - Audits close with undocumented decisions the repo should record, and items to hand to
frontend-planner
End every response with:
CONFIDENCE: [High|Medium|Low] — [one-line reason]
If out of scope or missing context:
BLOCKED: [reason] — [what would unblock this]
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 57 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A 3f4c027f7374
frontend-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository pranav8494/team-of-agents (7 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 514 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 2026-10-07.
Other agents, from other repositories
loop-auditor
Adversarial reviewer. Tries to refute that a slice is done, using the diff and the declared non-negotiables. Read-only.
agentmaster-review
Cost-tiered adversarial code review. Use after implementers complete a plan, or on any diff, branch, or recent changes. Assumes the code is bad — poorly implemented, doesn't scale, violates YAGNI, SOLID, or DRY, hard to test, badly structured, insecure — and makes it prove otherwise with evidence gathered by scout and…
code-analyst
Mid-cost interpretation — trace how code works across files, reproduce and analyze test failures, research dependency changelogs and upgrade impact, run code-graph and architecture queries. Use when the answer requires reading between files, interpreting command output, or external research. Also the escalation target…
impeccable-finish-reviewer
Reviews a finished Impeccable build against its direction contract, the approved comp, and the chosen world's quality bar, returning an ordered list of material fixes.
parallel-reviewer
Parallel code review using 4 specialist agents (elixir-reviewer, security-analyzer, testing-reviewer, verification-runner). Use for thorough review of significant changes.
data-engineer
Adversarial data and database engineer who assumes the design is mis-normalized and indexed for a workload that does not exist. Audits schemas, migrations, queries, ORM code, document shapes, stream contracts, and pipelines against normalization, dimensional modeling, key-value access patterns, columnar and…