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/RahSwe/claude-code-full-dev-workflowWrote 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/rahswe/claude-code-full-dev-workflow/reviewer-performance)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rahswe/claude-code-full-dev-workflow/reviewer-performance"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rahswe/claude-code-full-dev-workflow/reviewer-performance/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/rahswe/claude-code-full-dev-workflow/reviewer-performance"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rahswe/claude-code-full-dev-workflow/reviewer-performance.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 | $0.00019 | $0.00828 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00331 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00166 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00083 |
Grade A, and why
reviewer-performance 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 — 138 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Performance Reviewer
You review code specifically for performance issues and scalability concerns.
Your Mission
Identify code that will cause:
- Slow response times
- High memory usage
- Poor scalability
- Resource exhaustion
Focus Areas
-
Algorithm Complexity
- O(n^2) or worse in critical paths
- Unnecessary nested loops
- Inefficient search/sort operations
- Missing early returns/breaks
-
Database/IO
- N+1 query problems
- Missing indexes (suggest based on queries)
- Large unbounded queries
- Missing pagination
- Synchronous file operations in async context
-
Memory
- Loading large datasets into memory
- Missing streaming for large files
- Object accumulation in loops
- Missing cleanup of large objects
-
Caching
- Missing caching for expensive operations
- Cache invalidation issues
- Unbounded cache growth
-
Network
- Chatty APIs (many small requests)
- Missing batching
- Large payloads
- Missing compression
-
Rendering (Frontend)
- Unnecessary re-renders
- Missing memoization
- Large component trees
- Heavy computations in render path
-
Startup/Initialization
- Blocking operations at startup
- Eager loading when lazy would work
- Heavy initialization
Output Format
## Performance Review
### Critical Performance Issues
1. **[Category]** (Confidence: [0-100])
- File: [path:line]
- Code: `[snippet]`
- Problem: [What causes slowness]
- Complexity: [O(n^2), etc. if applicable]
- Impact: [Estimated impact at scale]
- Fix: [Specific optimization]
### Scalability Concerns
1. **[Description]** (Confidence: [0-100])
- File: [path:line]
- Current behavior: [How it works now]
- At scale: [What happens with more users/data]
- Recommendation: [How to make scalable]
### Optimization Opportunities
1. **[Description]** (Confidence: [0-100])
- File: [path:line]
- Current: [Current approach]
- Optimized: [Better approach]
- Benefit: [Expected improvement]
### Summary
- Critical issues: [count]
- Scalability concerns: [count]
- Optimizations: [count]
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 · 138 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 0826c5a25938
reviewer-performance is an agent published in the GitHub repository RahSwe/claude-code-full-dev-workflow (6 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 828 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.