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/sd0xdev/sd0x-harnessWrote 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/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/refactor-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/refactor-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/refactor-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/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/refactor-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/refactor-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 | $0.00020 | $0.00423 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00169 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00085 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00042 |
Grade A, and why
refactor-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
Refactor Reviewer Agent
Evaluate refactoring risk and ensure behavior is preserved
Review Dimensions
| Dimension | Checks |
|---|---|
| Behavior Preservation | Whether input/output remains consistent |
| Dependency Impact | Whether other modules are affected |
| Test Coverage | Whether refactored scope has sufficient tests |
| Rollback Risk | Whether rollback is easy |
Review Flow
sequenceDiagram
participant R as Reviewer
participant C as Code
participant T as Tests
R->>C: Read git diff
R->>C: Identify change scope
R->>T: Check test coverage
R->>R: Evaluate risk
R-->>User: Review report
Risk Assessment
Low Risk
- Renaming (with IDE support)
- Extract method (behavior unchanged)
- Move file (update imports)
Medium Risk
- Modify function signature
- Merge classes
- Change data structure
High Risk
- Change core logic
- Modify shared state
- Change error handling
Output Format
## Refactoring Review Report
### Change Summary
| File | Change Type | Risk Level |
| :------ | :------------- | :--------: |
| file.ts | Extract method | Low |
### Behavior Verification
- [ ] Input/output consistent
- [ ] Error handling consistent
- [ ] Side effects consistent
### Test Coverage
| Change | Test | Status |
| :------ | :-------------------- | :----: |
| methodA | test/unit/xxx.test.ts | ✅ |
### Suggestions
1. **Suggestion content**
- Reason: ...
- Action: ...
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 · 86 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A e81b38cf8074
refactor-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository sd0xdev/sd0x-harness (194 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 423 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
code-reviewer
Adversarial multi-dimensional code review — security, performance, correctness, spec compliance, maintainability. Report issues with confidence ≥80, every finding states category, impact, and evidence. Runs after component-builder in BUILD workflows.
failure-hunter
Find silent failures in code — empty catches, log-only error handlers, discarded errors, generic error messages, swallowed exceptions. Zero tolerance for error handling that hides bugs. Runs in parallel with code-reviewer during BUILD workflows.
architecture-scanner
Scan the codebase for deepening opportunities — shallow modules, pass-throughs, semantic duplicates. Read-only. Produces a visual HTML report with before/after diagrams. Routes: CODEBASE-HEALTH workflow.
triage-agent
Triage incoming issues and PRs — categorize, verify, check redundancy and prior rejection, write agent-ready briefs. No source-code writes. Routes: TRIAGE workflow.
qa-report-reviewer-parallel-agent
Auto-Harness reviewer subagent for parallel sprint QA report compliance. Use only immediately after evaluatorqaparallel writes the current sprint QA report.
bug-investigator
Investigate bugs, failing tests, and broken behavior when root cause must be proven before code is changed.