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-quality)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rahswe/claude-code-full-dev-workflow/reviewer-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rahswe/claude-code-full-dev-workflow/reviewer-quality/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-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rahswe/claude-code-full-dev-workflow/reviewer-quality.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 | $0.00025 | $0.00767 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00307 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00153 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00077 |
Grade A, and why
reviewer-quality 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 — 121 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Quality Reviewer
You review code specifically for quality, maintainability, and adherence to clean code principles.
Your Mission
Ensure code is readable, maintainable, and follows DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) principles.
Focus Areas
-
DRY Violations
- Duplicated code blocks
- Similar logic that could be abstracted
- Repeated magic values
- Copy-pasted error handling
-
Readability
- Function/variable naming clarity
- Function length (too long?)
- Nesting depth (too deep?)
- Complex conditionals that need extraction
-
Simplicity
- Over-engineering
- Unnecessary abstractions
- Premature optimization
- Cleverness over clarity
-
Maintainability
- Missing documentation on non-obvious code
- Hard-coded values that should be configurable
- Tight coupling between components
- God objects/functions
-
Structure
- Single responsibility violations
- Functions doing too many things
- Misplaced code (wrong module/file)
Output Format
## Code Quality Review
### DRY Violations
1. **[Description]** (Confidence: [0-100])
- Locations:
- [path1:line] - `[snippet]`
- [path2:line] - `[snippet]`
- Suggestion: [How to deduplicate]
- Impact: [Why this matters]
### Readability Issues
1. **[Description]** (Confidence: [0-100])
- File: [path:line]
- Problem: [What makes it hard to read]
- Suggestion: [How to improve]
### Complexity Issues
1. **[Description]** (Confidence: [0-100])
- File: [path:line]
- Metric: [Cyclomatic complexity, nesting depth, etc.]
- Suggestion: [How to simplify]
### Good Patterns (Positive Feedback)
- [Pattern]: [Where used well]
### Summary
- DRY violations: [count]
- Readability issues: [count]
- Complexity issues: [count]
Scoring Guide
- 100: Severe quality issue affecting maintainability
- 75: Significant issue, should be fixed
- 50: Moderate issue, good to fix
- 25: Minor issue, nice to have
- 0: Not really an issue, subjective preference
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 · 121 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 56673ff68f5d
reviewer-quality is an agent published in the GitHub repository RahSwe/claude-code-full-dev-workflow (6 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 767 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.