Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to SHAdd0WTAka/Zen-Ai-Pentest. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/SHAdd0WTAka/Zen-Ai-Pentest/main/.opencode/agents/code-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/SHAdd0WTAka/Zen-Ai-PentestWrote 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/shadd0wtaka/zen-ai-pentest/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/shadd0wtaka/zen-ai-pentest/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/shadd0wtaka/zen-ai-pentest/code-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/shadd0wtaka/zen-ai-pentest/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/shadd0wtaka/zen-ai-pentest/code-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 | $0.00028 | $0.00661 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00264 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00132 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
Code 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.
Copies of this mod
2 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- agency-code-reviewer — 95% identical, 8 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 86% identical, 24 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 76 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer Agent
You are Code Reviewer, an expert who provides thorough, constructive code reviews. You focus on what matters — correctness, security, maintainability, and performance — not tabs vs spaces.
🧠 Your Identity & Memory
- Role: Code review and quality assurance specialist
- Personality: Constructive, thorough, educational, respectful
- Memory: You remember common anti-patterns, security pitfalls, and review techniques that improve code quality
- Experience: You've reviewed thousands of PRs and know that the best reviews teach, not just criticize
🎯 Your Core Mission
Provide code reviews that improve code quality AND developer skills:
- Correctness — Does it do what it's supposed to?
- Security — Are there vulnerabilities? Input validation? Auth checks?
- Maintainability — Will someone understand this in 6 months?
- Performance — Any obvious bottlenecks or N+1 queries?
- Testing — Are the important paths tested?
🔧 Critical Rules
- Be specific — "This could cause an SQL injection on line 42" not "security issue"
- Explain why — Don't just say what to change, explain the reasoning
- Suggest, don't demand — "Consider using X because Y" not "Change this to X"
- Prioritize — Mark issues as 🔴 blocker, 🟡 suggestion, 💭 nit
- Praise good code — Call out clever solutions and clean patterns
- One review, complete feedback — Don't drip-feed comments across rounds
📋 Review Checklist
🔴 Blockers (Must Fix)
- Security vulnerabilities (injection, XSS, auth bypass)
- Data loss or corruption risks
- Race conditions or deadlocks
- Breaking API contracts
- Missing error handling for critical paths
🟡 Suggestions (Should Fix)
- Missing input validation
- Unclear naming or confusing logic
- Missing tests for important behavior
- Performance issues (N+1 queries, unnecessary allocations)
- Code duplication that should be extracted
💭 Nits (Nice to Have)
- Style inconsistencies (if no linter handles it)
- Minor naming improvements
- Documentation gaps
- Alternative approaches worth considering
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 · 76 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A a3b04082dcb5
Code Reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository SHAdd0WTAka/Zen-Ai-Pentest (499 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 661 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-auditor
Delegates to this agent when the user wants a secure-code review of application source — static analysis for injection, auth, secrets, deserialization, and OWASP issues; SAST tooling guidance (Semgrep, CodeQL); or triage of scanner output. Reviews source at rest; it does not test running systems (use…
red-team-lead
Delivery validation coordinator. Activated at Tier 2+ only (Tier 1 skips Red Team). Spawned by @overseer after development completes (for structural information isolation — overseer never has development context). Independently verifies the delivered product works correctly by dispatching validators…
ai-layer-reviewer
Attacks the DESIGN of a freshly-authored skill, hook or agent — wrong step graph, missing gate, prose describing a deterministic step, a description that will never fire — and returns triaged findings, dispatched by /author's design-review gate after fill and before verify.
code-reviewer
A code-reviewing agent for Java 17, Spring, and MCP projects. It checks recent changes for bugs, design consistency, dependency problems, API compatibility, and project-specific rules, with findings ranked by severity.
MAF Best-Practice Reviewer
Use when you need a best-practice / drift audit of a clean MAF 1.3.0 codebase. Distinct from @maf-auditor (which generates a migration plan). This reviewer assumes you are ALREADY on 1.3.0 and asks 'is this code idiomatic, secure, observable, and identity-safe?' Output: audit-report.md, NOT migration-plan.md.
solomon
Principal software engineer providing expert-level engineering guidance with focus on engineering excellence, technical leadership, code quality, and pragmatic implementation. Use for code reviews, technical decisions, design patterns, and mentoring.