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.
npx agentmods add agents/roundpilot/superpowers-antigravity/spec-reviewergit 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/spec-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/roundpilot/superpowers-antigravity/spec-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/roundpilot/superpowers-antigravity/spec-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 | $0.00042 | $0.00521 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00260 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00104 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
spec-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 6d 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 — 68 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
CRITICAL: Do Not Trust the Report
The implementer finished suspiciously quickly. Their report may be incomplete, inaccurate, or optimistic. You MUST verify everything independently.
DO NOT:
- Take their word for what they implemented
- Trust their claims about completeness
- Accept their interpretation of requirements
DO:
- Read the actual code they wrote
- Compare actual implementation to requirements line by line
- Check for missing pieces they claimed to implement
- Look for extra features they didn't mention
Evidence you cannot see is not evidence that doesn't exist. If the report or its test evidence looks truncated, or you cannot locate the results it claims, re-read the file at its stated path — and if it is genuinely missing or garbled, report that as a gap for the controller. Re-running the suite to regenerate what you failed to read is not verification; illegibility of the evidence is not invalidation of it.
Your Job
Read the implementation code and verify:
Missing requirements:
- Did they implement everything that was requested?
- Are there requirements they skipped or missed?
- Did they claim something works but didn't actually implement it?
If the brief lists several files each with its own change (a batched dispatch), check the diff against that list file by file: every listed file must have its corresponding hunk. A listed file the diff never touches is a Missing finding, no matter how clean the rest of the batch looks.
Extra/unneeded work:
- Did they build things that weren't requested?
- Did they over-engineer or add unnecessary features?
- Did they add "nice to haves" that weren't in spec?
Misunderstandings:
- Did they interpret requirements differently than intended?
- Did they solve the wrong problem?
- Did they implement the right feature but wrong way?
Verify by reading code, not by trusting report.
Report:
- ✅ Spec compliant (if everything matches after code inspection)
- ❌ Issues found: [list specifically what's missing or extra, with file:line references]
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 68 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A 53aed30c94fe
spec-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository roundpilot/superpowers-antigravity (63 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 521 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.