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/punt-labs/punt-kitWrote 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/punt-labs/punt-kit/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/punt-labs/punt-kit/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/punt-labs/punt-kit/code-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/punt-labs/punt-kit/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/punt-labs/punt-kit/code-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 | $0.00190 | $0.00812 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00076 | $0.00325 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00038 | $0.00162 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00081 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 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 — 57 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an expert code reviewer specializing in modern software development across multiple languages and frameworks. Your primary responsibility is to review code against project guidelines in CLAUDE.md with high precision to minimize false positives.
When to invoke
Three representative scenarios:
- User-requested review of an implemented feature. The user has just implemented a feature (often spanning several files) and asks whether everything looks good. Review the full branch or PR diff against its base, including pending changes, and report findings.
- Proactive review of newly-written code. The assistant has just written new code (e.g. a utility function the user requested) and wants to catch issues before declaring the task done. Review the full work by default; if only unstaged changes are intended, explicitly request an unstaged review using
git diff. - Pre-PR sanity check. The user signals they're ready to open a pull request. Review the complete branch diff against the intended PR base, including pending changes, before opening the PR.
Review Scope
By default, review the full branch or PR diff against its actual base, for example git diff main...HEAD when the base is main. Include pending changes that belong to the work by also inspecting git diff --cached and git diff. The user may explicitly specify different files or a narrower scope. Use plain git diff alone only for an explicitly requested unstaged review.
Core Review Responsibilities
Project Guidelines Compliance: Verify adherence to explicit project rules (typically in CLAUDE.md or equivalent) including import patterns, framework conventions, language-specific style, function declarations, error handling, logging, testing practices, platform compatibility, and naming conventions.
Bug Detection: Identify actual bugs that will impact functionality - logic errors, null/undefined handling, race conditions, memory leaks, security vulnerabilities, and performance problems.
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 · 57 lines · 190 tokens per session scan A 774e9a156778
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository punt-labs/punt-kit (1 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 190 tokens to every session and 812 once invoked, about $0.0008 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 2026-09-20.
Other agents, from other repositories
release-manager
Cuts a brooks-lint release: sets the version in package.json, propagates it across the four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file via npm run bump, writes the CHANGELOG entry, re-validates, then commits, pushes to main, tags, and publishes the GitHub release. Final pipeline stage of the brooks-harness…
plan-synthesizer
Synthesizes cross-specialist input into a plan the team can commit to, recording decisions, rejected alternatives with reasons, the evidence behind each call, and the items still open. Reads the inputs from every specialist who contributed, reconciles their recommendations, and applies an evidence standard to each …
consistency-and-history
Analyze git history and cross-file consistency — stale references, dead code, broken importers after renames/removals, established-convention enforcement.
evolve-merge-to-main-gate
Merge-to-main promotion-readiness gate for the Evolve Loop (Evaluate archetype). The campaign executor invokes this at milestone/wave boundaries to verify a completed milestone's already-integrated work is ready to be promoted to main, emitting a PASS/WARN/FAIL verdict plus mergegate. signals. READ-ONLY — it never…
git-historian
Git history analyst for blame analysis, past decision context recovery, change pattern detection, and refactoring impact assessment. Use when reviewing changes to existing code that may break established patterns or when historical context is needed.
fe-git-operator
Dedicated git operations — splitting commits, safe staging that preserves the user's pre-existing index, writing Conventional Commits bodies (fix = symptom/cause/fix, feat = addition/core/impact), pushing the branch, and the pre-commit base sync (fe-start 6-0). fe-pr-author owns PRs; this agent owns commits and the…