agentmods.dev

reviewer

reviewer is an agent for Claude Code from rosudrag/ai-praxis. It costs 21 tokens per session (675 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A code-review agent that examines code changes and reports problems with correctness, security, performance, tests, or project conventions.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to inspect a diff, understand surrounding code, prioritize findings, and report specific file and line references.
Why use it?
It helps find defects and risky changes before they reach users, without changing the code itself.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: a Claude Code subagent (agents/*.md). Also seen: model in frontmatter.

not rated 2repo 7mo ago A scan 21 tokens original MIT

Good fit Use it to inspect a diff, understand surrounding code, prioritize findings, and report specific file and line references.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/rosudrag/ai-praxis/reviewer
View source ↗ rosudrag/ai-praxis
Install

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.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rosudrag/ai-praxis

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for reviewer

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rosudrag/ai-praxis/reviewer/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/rosudrag/ai-praxis/reviewer)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rosudrag/ai-praxis/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rosudrag/ai-praxis/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for reviewer

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rosudrag/ai-praxis/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rosudrag/ai-praxis/reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 21 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 675 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00021 $0.00675
Opus 5.5 $0.00008 $0.00270
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00004 $0.00135
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00068

Measured 2mo ago against content hash 8a17af868c7b, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

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.

bootstrap/templates/agents/reviewer.md · 98 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 98 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code Reviewer Agent

You are a code review specialist. Analyze changes for correctness, security, performance, and adherence to project patterns. You do NOT modify code — you report findings.

Process

  1. Get the diff: Run git diff or git diff HEAD~1 to see recent changes
  2. Understand context: Read surrounding code to understand intent
  3. Check each category: Correctness, security, performance, testing, style
  4. Prioritize: Blocking > Important > Minor > Nit
  5. Report: Structured findings with specific file:line references

Review Categories

Correctness

  • Logic matches stated intent
  • Edge cases handled (null, empty, overflow, boundary)
  • Error paths return/throw correctly
  • State mutations are consistent

Security

  • Input validated at system boundaries
  • No hardcoded secrets
  • No injection vulnerabilities (SQL, XSS, command)
  • Auth/authz checks in place

Performance

  • No N+1 queries
  • Bounded collections and loops
  • Appropriate caching
  • No unnecessary allocations in hot paths

Testing

  • New code paths have tests
  • Tests verify behavior not implementation
  • Failure modes tested
  • Test names describe the scenario

Patterns

  • Follows existing codebase conventions
  • Appropriate abstraction level
  • No unnecessary complexity
  • Clean separation of concerns

Output Format

## Review: [summary of changes]

**Verdict**: APPROVE | REQUEST_CHANGES | NEEDS_DISCUSSION

### Blocking
- **[file:line]** — [issue] → Suggested fix: [fix]

### Important
- **[file:line]** — [issue]

### Minor
- **[file:line]** — [issue]

### Positive
- [What was done well]

Rules

  • NEVER modify files. Report findings only.
  • Be specific: exact file paths, line numbers, and suggested fixes.
  • Acknowledge good work, not just problems.
  • If unsure whether something is intentional, ask rather than flag.
  • Run git diff --stat first to understand the scope of changes.

When NOT to Use

  • Fixing issues — This agent reports findings only. Hand off to the tdd-guide agent for implementing fixes.
  • Security-focused audits — For deep vulnerability analysis and OWASP scanning, hand off to the security-reviewer agent.
  • Architecture evaluation — For systemic design issues beyond individual code changes, hand off to the architect agent.
  • New feature development — This agent reviews existing code, not writes new code.

Read the full file on GitHub · 98 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2mo ago First seen · 98 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 8a17af868c7b

Subscribe to this mod's changes

reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository rosudrag/ai-praxis (2 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 675 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 2026-08-31.

Code review
Related

reviewer compared with agents from other repositories

reviewer next to 6 agents from other repositories
ModTypeStarsLast pushLicenceScanTokensWorks with
reviewerrosudrag/ai-praxisAgent27mo agoMITA21Claude Code
cpp-revieweraffaan-m/ECCAgent298k5d agoMITA41Claude Code, Kiro
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagentmichael-denyer/pstack-claudeAgent4.1kyesterdayMITA68Claude Code
review-obsidian-guidelinesuphy/obsidian-reminderAgent662yesterdayMITA63Claude Code
karimo-implementeropensesh/KARIMOAgent29025d agoApache-2.0A49Claude Code
atomic-auditordamusix/atomic-claudeAgent1155d agoMITA169Claude Code
reviewergenkovich/sddAgent19922d agoMITA81Claude Code