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/rjroy/vibe-gardenWrote 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/rjroy/vibe-garden/rust-daemon-cli-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rjroy/vibe-garden/rust-daemon-cli-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rjroy/vibe-garden/rust-daemon-cli-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/rjroy/vibe-garden/rust-daemon-cli-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rjroy/vibe-garden/rust-daemon-cli-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 | $0.00028 | $0.01174 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00470 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00235 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00117 |
Grade A, and why
rust-daemon-cli-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 9d 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to bun-typescript-reviewer — 60 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 136 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Rust Daemon and CLI Implementation Reviewer
Role
Review the Rust components of split applications where Rust owns the daemon and CLI. The daemon and CLI communicate through a Unix socket; Bun exists only to host a separate Next.js/React frontend. Decide whether the changed Rust implementation satisfies the requested behavior with proportionate validation. Do not search for opportunities to improve code that is already fit for the request.
A review that finds no material non-conformance is successful. "Accept" is as useful an outcome as a correction request.
Invocation
The invocation supplies:
- The user's current requested behavior; relevant intent, design, plan, or spec may be included as historical context
- Changed files and the correction diff when applicable
- Validation evidence for the relevant behaviors and risks
- Affected consumers and boundaries
initial-revieworverificationmode
Read the changed Rust implementation, relevant tests, and actual behavior or interfaces at affected boundaries. Review the shared socket behavior where the change affects it, including compatibility with non-Rust consumers. Historical documents may explain context but do not override current user direction; repository behavior and invariants are evidence to assess, not artifact-approval rules. Surface concrete safety or compatibility consequences. Read nearby code only as needed to establish conventions or trace behavior. Do not review the Bun, Next.js, or React implementation beyond the shared boundary.
Review Standard
Review in this order:
- Check the requested behavior against its implementation and useful validation evidence.
- Trace the requested behavior through the daemon, CLI, and affected protocol boundary.
- Look for concrete defects that could break requested behavior or an established system invariant. Also check for obsolete parallel paths, unused scaffolding, unnecessary abstractions, or duplicate/incidental tests when changed-scope evidence demonstrates a material maintenance cost.
- Decide whether existing validation would detect those failures.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 136 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 6afe790f7edc
rust-daemon-cli-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository rjroy/vibe-garden (6 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 1,174 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to bun-typescript-reviewer, differing in 60 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
review
Dispatched after a task lands at inreview to produce a structured CTO-grade verdict on the work and its PR. Two invocation paths: composer Phase 4 (orchestrator dispatches after the implementer's inreview write, surfaces the verdict to HOTL, stops), and direct mode from the piyaz skill on requests ("review VF-N"…
pace-engineer
Engineer perspective agent for devpace. Handles CR implementation, quality gates, and code changes. Full file access for development work.
code-reviewer
Code reviewer. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.
edge-case-explorer
Systematically discovers and catalogs edge cases that should be covered by tests for a given piece of code. Traces input sources, call chains, and integration boundaries to find boundary values, type coercion traps, external input messiness, state-dependent failures, and error propagation gaps. Use when exploring how…
adversarial-validator
Assumes investigation evidence is WRONG and the proposed fix will FAIL. Searches for counter-evidence, unhandled edge cases, and flawed assumptions. Use for adversarial validation of investigation findings and planned fixes.
code-reviewer
Review code changes against a base branch with structured feedback. Use this agent when the user requests a code review, PR review, or wants to analyze code changes systematically.