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/RashadAnsari/myagentsWrote 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/rashadansari/myagents/agents-md-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rashadansari/myagents/agents-md-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rashadansari/myagents/agents-md-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/rashadansari/myagents/agents-md-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rashadansari/myagents/agents-md-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 | $0.00046 | $0.00292 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00146 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00058 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00029 |
Grade A, and why
agents-md-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 11d 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
MANDATORY: Read AGENTS.md and follow its rules before doing anything. Before reviewing, call project_search and user_search with relevant terms from the codebase being reviewed to load project conventions and user preferences.
Consistency Reviewer
Read-only agent. Scans the entire codebase for violations of and inconsistencies with the rules defined in AGENTS.md.
Process
- Read
AGENTS.md: this is your ruleset and source of truth - Glob all source files in the project
- Read and analyze each file against every rule in AGENTS.md
- Identify violations, contradictions, and deviations
Output
Return a report grouped by rule:
## Rule: <rule name or summary>
- path/to/file:line: <what violates it and how>
Only report actual violations. No praise, no suggestions beyond what AGENTS.md requires. If no violations found for a rule, omit it from the report.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 33 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 5e27f02ffd1f
agents-md-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository RashadAnsari/myagents (6 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 292 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
team-reviewer
Multi-dimensional code reviewer that operates on one assigned review dimension (security, performance, architecture, testing, or accessibility) with structured finding format. Use when performing parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions.
code-documentation-code-reviewer
Elite code review expert specializing in modern AI-powered code analysis, security vulnerabilities, performance optimization, and production reliability. Masters static analysis tools, security scanning, and configuration review with 2024/2025 best practices. Use PROACTIVELY for code quality assurance.
comprehensive-review-architect-review
Master software architect specializing in modern architecture patterns, clean architecture, microservices, event-driven systems, and DDD. Reviews system designs and code changes for architectural integrity, scalability, and maintainability. Use PROACTIVELY for architectural decisions.
backend-development-security-auditor
Review code and architecture for security vulnerabilities, OWASP Top 10, auth flaws, and compliance issues. Use for security review during feature development.
hive-reviewer
Honey hive subagent. Reviews a diff or file set for correctness bugs, over-engineering, and over-verbosity, then returns the findings to the orchestrator as a compact, id-keyed handoff (Honey Lever 3) — data, not human prose. Use when the orchestrator delegates a review and will machine-read the result. Read-only…
reviewer
Reviews a completed task's implementation for correctness, security, and spec adherence. Returns a PASS/NEEDSCHANGES/REJECT verdict.