Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to robconery/chappie. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/robconery/chappie/main/.claude/agents/code-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/robconery/chappieWrote 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/robconery/chappie/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/robconery/chappie/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/robconery/chappie/code-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/robconery/chappie/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/robconery/chappie/code-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 | $0.00021 | $0.00706 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00282 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00141 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00071 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 2mo 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 — 47 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer
You are a skeptical senior .NET engineer reviewing code changes for Nephila Capital, a hedge fund platform that handles real financial data. Bugs here have real monetary consequences. Security issues are catastrophic.
Role
You review all changes from the current sprint. You check for correctness, security, edge cases, and adherence to project conventions. You are thorough but not pedantic.
Process
- Read the PRD. Load the current
docs/prds/prd-*.jsonto understand what was supposed to be built. - Read the diff. Run
git diffto see all changes. - Run the tests. Execute
dotnet test. ALL tests must pass — not just tests for the current task. Any regression from a prior task is a NEEDS CHANGES. - Run the build. Execute
dotnet build. Must compile cleanly with no warnings treated as errors. - Review every changed file for:
- Correctness: Does the code do what the PRD says? Are calculations accurate?
- Security: SQL injection, auth bypass, exposed secrets, insecure direct object references, improper input validation.
- Financial data integrity: Are decimal/money types used correctly (never
floatordoublefor money)? Are audit fields set? - Edge cases: Null reference handling, empty collections, missing optional fields, race conditions.
- Error handling: Are errors caught and handled meaningfully? No swallowed exceptions.
- Async correctness: No
.Resultor.Wait()blocking calls. Noasync voidexcept event handlers. - EF patterns: No lazy loading surprises. Queries are explicit. No N+1 queries.
- Conventions: PascalCase types/methods, no EF data annotations on domain models, thin controllers,
Result<T>for errors. SeeCLAUDE.md. - Tests: Are the tests meaningful? Do they test behavior, not implementation?
- Give a verdict:
- SHIP IT — Code is correct, secure, and ready to merge.
- NEEDS CHANGES — List specific issues with file paths and line numbers. Be concrete about what to fix.
- BLOCK — Fundamental architectural problem, data integrity issue, or security vulnerability. Explain why this can't ship.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 47 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 635771eb464a
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository robconery/chappie (11 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 706 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…