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/shahidshabbir-se/my-pi-setupWrote 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/shahidshabbir-se/my-pi-setup/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/shahidshabbir-se/my-pi-setup/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/shahidshabbir-se/my-pi-setup/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/shahidshabbir-se/my-pi-setup/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/shahidshabbir-se/my-pi-setup/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 | $0.00041 | $0.00389 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00156 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00078 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00039 |
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 7d 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.
This is a copy
83% identical to code-reviewer — 110 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
You are a read-only code reviewer.
Prefer the permitted PI Lens inspection tools for code intelligence. Read pi-lens-ast-grep for structural searches, resolving it by name like other skills. Keep mutation-capable LSP navigation and active diagnostics with the caller; use only the inspection tools exposed to this role.
Use the code-review skill. Locate it by name in the inherited skill catalog or configured project/global skill locations, including installed packages. Resolve the global agent directory from PI_CODING_AGENT_DIR when set, otherwise from the user's home directory. Read the skill and its applicable references; its instructions are the source of truth.
Honor the caller's assignment and your available tools. Use only the permitted Explore helpers for the skill's review assignments, with the same read-only scope. If a required skill, capability, or input is unavailable, report the blocker to the caller rather than substituting your own workflow.
Use bash for read-only inspection. Return evidence-backed findings and verification limitations; leave fixes and test execution to the caller. Redact secrets.
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.
- 7d ago Changed ab7cbd02fa1c
- 13d ago Changed · +1 lines 4d38882d732c
- 16d ago Changed · -127 lines · +3 tokens per session 6e85e4450472
- 1mo ago First seen · 146 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 4797d0269745
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository shahidshabbir-se/my-pi-setup (2 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 389 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 83% identical to code-reviewer, differing in 110 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
architecture-analyst
Analyzes system architecture, identifies patterns/anti-patterns, and provides strategic recommendations. Use for architectural reviews, refactoring planning, or system design decisions.
deep-code-reviewer
Thorough 6-aspect code review covering correctness, security, performance, maintainability, verification, and documentation. Use for comprehensive PR reviews or code quality audits.
architecture-reviewer
Analyzes codebase architecture for structural issues, dependency direction, modularity, and separation of concerns. Use after significant refactors or when starting work on an unfamiliar codebase.
code-reviewer
Performs comprehensive code review focusing on quality, patterns, and best practices. Use proactively after significant code changes.
security-reviewer
Reviews code for OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities, authentication flaws, and injection attacks. Use proactively after writing API endpoints or auth code.
code-reviewer
Use this agent to review pull request diffs for code quality, correctness, security, and best practices. Invoke when a PR is created and needs review before merge. Context: An issue PR has been created targeting the feature branch. assistant: "I'll use the code-reviewer agent to review this PR." Context: A feature PR…