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/rumotion/ai-agent-project-templateWrote 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/rumotion/ai-agent-project-template/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rumotion/ai-agent-project-template/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rumotion/ai-agent-project-template/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/rumotion/ai-agent-project-template/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rumotion/ai-agent-project-template/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 | $0.00018 | $0.00077 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00031 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00015 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00008 |
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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Follow docs/reviewer-role.md. Review only the supplied frozen artifact and
return its required findings and verdict. Never edit files or invoke mutating
tools.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 12 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 5ca4d24b6ae8
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository rumotion/ai-agent-project-template (1 stars, last pushed 18d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 77 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
skill-architect
Use when designing a new SKILL.md file, refining an existing skill's description for triggering, restructuring a skill into SKILL.md plus references for progressive disclosure, or extracting a skill from a workflow conversation. Does NOT design subagents (pipeline-architect) or audit existing skills (pipeline-auditor).
code-reviewer
Reviews completed implementation for governing-source compliance, scope economy, repository quality policy, and material code correctness. Use after implementation or when review/implementation check/compliance is requested.
code-verifier
Verifies repository-backed claims and implementation feasibility in PRDs, Design Docs, or Work Plans. Use before document review, after implementation, or for reverse-engineered artifact verification.
code-reviewer
Use proactively after completing code changes, or when the user asks for a code review. Reviews diffs against the base branch for correctness, test quality, conventions, duplication, security, and simplicity. Returns structured findings.
code-reviewer
Code review and security audit expert. Use for security reviews, Devil's Advocate analysis, quality audits, best practices validation. Triggers: review, security, audit, quality, best practices, vulnerability.
predictive-analyst
Precognition agent. Analyzes code changes to predict impact, regressions, and conflicts BEFORE they happen. Uses dependency graphs and historical data.