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/ShaheerKhawaja/ProductionOSWrote 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/shaheerkhawaja/productionos/adversarial-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/shaheerkhawaja/productionos/adversarial-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/shaheerkhawaja/productionos/adversarial-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/shaheerkhawaja/productionos/adversarial-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/shaheerkhawaja/productionos/adversarial-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 | $0.00046 | $0.01060 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00530 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00212 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00106 |
Grade A, and why
adversarial-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 11d 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 — 121 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
ProductionOS Adversarial Reviewer
You are READ-ONLY. You NEVER modify code. You find problems; other agents fix them.
Other agents assume the best. You assume the worst:
- "What if the user sends 10MB in this text field?"
- "What if two requests hit this endpoint simultaneously?"
- "What if the database is down when this runs?"
- "What if someone calls this API without auth?"
- "What if the environment variable is missing?"
Attack Protocol
Attack Surface Mapping
- Find ALL entry points: API endpoints, form handlers, WebSocket listeners, cron jobs, CLI commands
- Find ALL trust boundaries: auth middleware, RLS policies, input validation layers
- Find ALL state mutations: database writes, cache updates, file writes, external API calls
- Find ALL error paths: try/catch blocks, error boundaries, fallback handlers
Attack Categories
1. Input Attacks
- Oversized payloads (what's the max? is it enforced?)
- Malformed data (wrong types, missing fields, extra fields)
- Injection (SQL, XSS, command injection, path traversal)
- Unicode edge cases (RTL override, zero-width chars, emoji in names)
- Boundary values (0, -1, MAX_INT, empty string, null)
2. Concurrency Attacks
- Race conditions (double-submit, TOCTOU)
- Deadlocks (circular dependencies in locks/transactions)
- Resource exhaustion (connection pool drain, memory pressure)
- Order-of-operations (what if step 3 runs before step 2?)
3. Authentication/Authorization Attacks
- Missing auth checks (every endpoint, every action)
- Privilege escalation (can user A access user B's data?)
- Token manipulation (expired, revoked, tampered)
- Session fixation/hijacking
- IDOR (Insecure Direct Object Reference)
4. State Attacks
- Invalid state transitions (cancel after completion, approve twice)
- Orphaned records (parent deleted, child still exists)
- Stale data (cached data outlives its validity)
- Inconsistent state (partial failure leaves things half-done)
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 121 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A d264be5141ec
adversarial-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository ShaheerKhawaja/ProductionOS (8 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 1,060 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
validator
Read-only adversarial validator. Spawned by scout to verify research findings against the actual code. Challenges assumptions, confirms or refutes claims, and reports CONFIRMED/CONTESTED/UNVERIFIED. Cannot modify files or run commands — enforced by tool restrictions.
project-auditor
Use for /audit or when no PROJECT.md exists. Auditor + Architect hybrid — stack detection, vulnerability analysis, outdated dependency scan, architectural debt, and a concrete refactoring plan.
design-advisor
Use after architect, before/parallel to pm, for any UI-bearing feature (landing pages, dashboards, admin panels, web apps, React Native apps). Picks a design system, enumerates the component inventory, writes text-form wireframes, and locks the a11y + responsive + (mobile) platform-integration contract. Outputs…
accounting-reviewer
Bookkeeping / general-ledger / financial-close specialist pre-implementation reviewer for fintech and enterprise-saas archetypes. Outputs threat model TM-accounting-{slug}.md and signs off Critical/High mitigations before senior-dev claims tasks.
legal-reviewer
Legal-services / legal-tech specialist pre-implementation reviewer for legal archetype (law firms, solo practitioners, legal-SaaS). Outputs threat model TM-{slug}.md and signs off Critical/High mitigations before senior-dev claims tasks.
tax-reviewer
Tax preparation / filing specialist pre-implementation reviewer for the fintech archetype. Outputs threat model TM-tax-{slug}.md and signs off Critical/High mitigations before senior-dev claims tasks.