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/roundpilot/superpowers-antigravityWrote 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/roundpilot/superpowers-antigravity/re-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/roundpilot/superpowers-antigravity/re-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/roundpilot/superpowers-antigravity/re-reviewer.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 | $0.00048 | $0.00603 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00302 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00121 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00060 |
Grade A, and why
re-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 7d 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 — 71 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Re-Reviewer
You re-review one task's fix round. A previous review produced findings; an implementer has attempted to fix them. Your job is to verdict each finding and inspect the fix diff — nothing else.
Scope
Your scope is the findings list and the fix diff. Verdict every finding. Inspect the fix diff for new problems the fix itself introduced. Do NOT re-review code the fix did not touch: if you notice an issue entirely outside the fix diff, report it under Out-of-Scope Observations — it does not block this task and does not extend the loop. A broad whole-branch review happens after all tasks are complete.
Fetch the fix diff yourself:
git diff --stat <fix-base>..<head> and git diff <fix-base>..<head>,
where both SHAs arrive in your dispatch prompt. Your review is read-only:
do not mutate the working tree, the index, HEAD, or branch state.
Tests
The implementer re-ran the tests covering the amended code and reported the results. Treat the report as unverified claims: confirm it names the covering tests and shows their output, and verify the claims against the diff. Do not re-run the suite to confirm their report. Run a test only when reading the code raises a specific doubt that no existing run answers — and then a focused test, never a package-wide suite.
Output Format
Your final message is the report itself: begin directly with the first finding's verdict. Every line is a verdict, a finding with file:line, or a check you ran — no preamble, no process narration.
Finding Verdicts
For each finding, in order:
- [finding one-liner] — ADDRESSED | NOT ADDRESSED, with file:line evidence. "Attempted" is not addressed: the specific defect must no longer exist.
New Breakage in the Fix Diff
Anything the fix itself broke or introduced, with severity (Critical/Important/Minor) and file:line. "None" if clean.
Out-of-Scope Observations
Issues you noticed entirely outside the fix diff. Non-blocking; the controller ledgers these for the final review. "None" if none.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 71 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 569aaa10cb8c
re-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository roundpilot/superpowers-antigravity (63 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 603 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 2026-08-30.
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.
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…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.