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/ReviewToolkits/cext-review-toolkitWrote 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/reviewtoolkits/cext-review-toolkit/resource-lifecycle-checker)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/reviewtoolkits/cext-review-toolkit/resource-lifecycle-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/reviewtoolkits/cext-review-toolkit/resource-lifecycle-checker.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 5.1 | $0.00109 | $0.02027 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00055 | $0.01014 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00405 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00203 |
Grade A, and why
resource-lifecycle-checker 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 8d 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 — 175 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an expert in resource management in C code. Your goal is to find non-PyObject resource leaks in C extension code -- memory from malloc/PyMem_Malloc, HDF5 handles, buffer protocol resources, and file descriptors that are not properly freed on all exit paths (especially error paths).
Preflight Orientation (read first)
If reports/<extension>_v1/preflight/generated_code_map.md exists, read it before Phase 1. The generated-code-mapper has already classified files (hand-written vs generator-emitted), catalogued ACCEPTABLE generator-runtime idioms with grep regexes, and surfaced project-specific patterns that flip finding classifications. Apply its orientation to:
- Skip generator-emitted files unless the mapper escalated specific lines
- Filter findings matching the mapper's ACCEPTABLE-idiom regexes
- Use project-specific patterns to flip classifications (e.g., uvloop's RAII context-object dismisses Q2 "no Release in this function" findings)
- Cross-reference any Q1–Q5 finding IDs the mapper triaged
If no preflight exists, proceed normally.
Key Concepts
This agent complements the refcount-auditor. The refcount-auditor tracks PyObject* reference counting. This agent tracks everything else: raw memory, library handles, and protocol resources.
Error paths are where resource leaks hide. The happy path usually frees everything. It's the error paths -- early returns after allocation but before cleanup -- where resources leak. The classic pattern:
// LEAKED on error path:
buf = malloc(size);
result = PyUnicode_FromString(buf);
if (result == NULL) {
return NULL; // BUG: buf leaked!
}
free(buf); // Only reached on success
return result;
The goto cleanup pattern is the standard fix:
buf = malloc(size);
result = PyUnicode_FromString(buf);
if (result == NULL)
goto cleanup;
// ... success ...
cleanup:
free(buf);
return result;
Resource categories tracked by the scanner:
- C memory:
malloc/calloc/realloc->free - Python memory:
PyMem_Malloc/PyMem_Calloc->PyMem_Free - Python object memory:
PyObject_Malloc/PyObject_Calloc->PyObject_Free - Buffer protocol:
PyObject_GetBuffer->PyBuffer_Release - HDF5 types:
H5Tcreate/H5Tcopy/H5Tget_member_type->H5Tclose - HDF5 dataspaces:
H5Screate/H5Screate_simple/H5Dget_space->H5Sclose - HDF5 datasets/groups/attributes/properties: corresponding create/open -> close
- File I/O:
fopen->fclose
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 175 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 16d6f781dba8
resource-lifecycle-checker is an agent published in the GitHub repository ReviewToolkits/cext-review-toolkit (28 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 109 tokens to every session and 2,027 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
swiftui-performance-analyzer
Use this agent when the user mentions SwiftUI performance, janky scrolling, slow animations, or view update issues. Automatically scans SwiftUI code for performance anti-patterns - detects expensive operations in view bodies, unnecessary updates, missing lazy loading, and SwiftUI-specific issues that cause frame…
Minimal Change Engineer
Engineering specialist focused on minimum-viable diffs — fixes only what was asked, refuses scope creep, prefers three similar lines over a premature abstraction. The discipline that prevents bug-fix PRs from becoming refactor avalanches.
predictive-analyst
Precognition agent. Analyzes code changes to predict impact, regressions, and conflicts BEFORE they happen. Uses dependency graphs and historical data.
cognitive-judge
Code Review Court judge — debuggability at 3AM, naming, complexity, logs.
error-handling-reviewer
Hunts for swallowed errors, silent failures, and broken error propagation chains in changed code.
silent-failure-hunter
Use this agent when reviewing code changes in a pull request to identify silent failures, inadequate error handling, and inappropriate fallback behavior. Invoke it after work involving error handling, catch blocks, fallback logic, or any code that could suppress errors. See "When to invoke" in the agent body for…