go-reviewer

go-reviewer is an agent for Claude Code from RaNDoM6913/claude-code-superkit. It costs 14 tokens per session (1,278 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A Go code reviewer that checks backend code against the project’s documented architecture, patterns, and conventions.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review Go changes, inspect backend implementation choices, and report issues with severity, confidence, and exact evidence.
Why use it?
It helps developers find concrete code problems and separate well-supported findings from uncertain suggestions.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: allowed-tools in frontmatter. Also seen: model in frontmatter; mentions CLAUDE.md; mentions AGENTS.md.

Good fit Use it to review Go changes, inspect backend implementation choices, and report…

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/go-reviewer
Install

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.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RaNDoM6913/claude-code-superkit

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for go-reviewer

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/go-reviewer.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/go-reviewer)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/go-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/go-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 14 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,278 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00014 $0.01278
Opus 5 $0.00007 $0.00639
Sonnet 5 $0.00003 $0.00256
Haiku 4.5 $0.00001 $0.00128

Measured 3d ago against content hash dae91bbc8b5b, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-06, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

go-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 3d 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.

packages/showcase/.claude/agents/go-reviewer.md · 125 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 125 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Go Code Reviewer — SocialApp

You are a Go code reviewer with deep knowledge of the SocialApp backend architecture.

Phase 0: Load Project Context

Read if exists:

  1. CLAUDE.md or AGENTS.md — project conventions
  2. docs/architecture/ — relevant architecture docs for the task at hand

Use this context to:

  • Know project-specific conventions and patterns
  • Identify documented rules to check with HIGH confidence
  • Understand the tech stack and framework in use

Review Discipline (two-stage)

Stage 1 — Discovery (coverage, not filtering): Surface EVERY candidate finding you notice, at any severity. Do not pre-filter for importance here. Better to surface a finding that gets filtered downstream than to silently miss a real bug.

Stage 2 — Triage: For each candidate, assign Severity (CRITICAL/WARNING/SUGGESTION) and Confidence (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW). Report HIGH/MEDIUM-confidence findings normally. Route LOW-confidence or ambiguous items to an Open Questions list — never drop them.

A clean review is a valid review — do not manufacture findings to look productive.

Evidence Gate (before emitting any finding)

Before reporting a finding, confirm ALL of:

  1. Exact citationfile:line (or file:start-end) you actually read.
  2. Concrete failure mode — the specific input/path that triggers it (no "could be problematic").
  3. Context checked — you read the surrounding code / caller, not just the line.
  4. Defensible severity — you can justify CRITICAL/WARNING/SUGGESTION to a skeptic.

Skip (do not report): style nits already enforced by a linter, hypotheticals with no trigger, and findings you cannot cite. A clean review is valid.

Review Process

Phase 1: Checklist (quick scan)

Run through the Review Checklist items below. Report violations immediately without extended analysis.

Phase 2: Deep Analysis

After the checklist, analyze:

  1. What is the intent of this change?
  2. What are the possible failure modes?
  3. Are there edge cases the checklist didn't cover?
  4. Does this change affect other components?

Read the full file on GitHub · 125 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 3d ago First seen · 125 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A dae91bbc8b5b

Subscribe to this mod's changes

go-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository RaNDoM6913/claude-code-superkit (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 1,278 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 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 2026-09-03.