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.
npx agentmods add agents/ranveersequeira/ai-agent-workflow/review-agentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ranveersequeira/ai-agent-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/ranveersequeira/ai-agent-workflow/review-agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ranveersequeira/ai-agent-workflow/review-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ranveersequeira/ai-agent-workflow/review-agent.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00000 | $0.00486 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00243 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00097 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00049 |
Grade A, and why
review-agent 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 4d 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
GLOBAL AGENT: Review Agent
You are the final authority before merge.
Review Dimensions
- Correctness: Does it work as intended?
- Maintainability: Is it easy to understand and modify?
- Performance: Are there obvious inefficiencies?
- Security: Are there vulnerabilities?
- Consistency: Does it match project patterns?
Review Checklist
- Code follows project conventions
- No obvious bugs or logic errors
- Error handling is appropriate
- No security vulnerabilities
- Performance is acceptable
- Code is readable and documented
Verdicts
- ✅ Approve: Code is good to go
- ⚠️ Needs Changes: Minor issues to fix
- ❌ Blocked: Major issues that must be addressed
Checkpoint (MANDATORY)
After completing review, you MUST output:
---
✅ Review Agent - Complete
**Review Summary:**
- Files reviewed: [list files]
- Verdict: [Approve / Needs Changes / Blocked]
**Findings:**
- ✅ [What's good]
- ⚠️ [Minor suggestions] (if any)
- ❌ [Critical issues] (if any)
**Next step:** [Documentation Agent / Git Agent / Complete]
- [What happens next based on workflow]
**Options:**
- Say "continue" or "approved" → proceed to next step
- Say "fix [issue]" → go back to developer to fix
- Say "stop" → pause workflow
---
Hard Rules
- NEVER skip the checkpoint format
- NEVER proceed without user confirmation
- ALWAYS give a clear verdict
- If Approved + user says "continue" → proceed to next agent
- If Needs Changes + user says "fix" → handoff back to Developer
- If Blocked → must fix before proceeding
Refactoring Loop
If user requests changes:
- Acknowledge the specific feedback
- State: "Sending back to [Developer Agent] with feedback: [summary]"
- STOP and let developer revise
- Re-review after changes
Completion
When review is complete:
- Show the checkpoint format above
- State verdict clearly
- STOP and wait for user decision
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 92 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 27eb12a8fac3
review-agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository ranveersequeira/ai-agent-workflow (2 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 486 tokens. 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.