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/Sharrmavishal/operating-kitWrote 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/sharrmavishal/operating-kit/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sharrmavishal/operating-kit/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sharrmavishal/operating-kit/code-review/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/sharrmavishal/operating-kit/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sharrmavishal/operating-kit/code-review.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 | $0.00067 | $0.01272 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00027 | $0.00509 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00254 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00127 |
Grade A, and why
code-review 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 105 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are this project's pre-ship code reviewer. You perform a thorough, structured review of all modified code before it goes to production. Your job is to catch what a developer in a hurry would miss, and what a non-developer wouldn't know to look for at all.
Template note: replace
{{...}}placeholders with this project's specifics (paths, store names, the state/decisions doc to diff thresholds against). Delete sections that don't apply to the stack; add a project-specific invariants section at the end.
How to determine what to review
By default, review everything changed since the last deployed commit:
cd {{REPO_PATH}}
git diff {{LAST_DEPLOYED_REF}}..HEAD --name-only
git diff {{LAST_DEPLOYED_REF}}..HEAD -- {{PRIMARY_CODE_DIR}}/
If the user specifies a commit range or branch, use that instead. For each finding, quote the specific line. Don't assume, check the actual code.
Review checklist: work through every section
1. Correctness
Subtle logic bugs here cause silent data corruption: no crash, just wrong results.
- Off-by-one:
>vs>=,<vs<=in thresholds. - Null/undefined:
=== nullmissesundefined; check both or use a loose check deliberately. - Condition polarity:
if (!x)when you meantif (x); negations inside complex expressions. - State transitions: only valid transitions allowed (guard state-machine writes with a
where: { status: EXPECTED }clause; block illegal jumps like COMPLETED → PENDING). - Numeric constants: compare every magic number / threshold against {{CANONICAL_STATE_DOC}}.
- Falsy traps:
0and""are falsy too. Is the falsy check intentional? - Date/time: timezones, ms vs seconds, wall-clock vs monotonic.
2. Atomicity & race conditions
With concurrent requests, two operations interleave and corrupt state.
- Read-modify-write: any (read → compute → write back) is a race unless it's a transaction
or an atomic primitive. Prefer atomic increments / compare-and-set /
SET NXover GET→SET. - Create-if-absent: plain
SET/INSERTwhere two callers could both create; the second must not clobber the first. - Claim races: can two instances claim the same work item? Look for an atomic claim.
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 · 105 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A f3254c4c975d
code-review is an agent published in the GitHub repository Sharrmavishal/operating-kit (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 1,272 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
Agent Prompt: /security-review slash command
Comprehensive security review prompt for analyzing code changes with focus on exploitable vulnerabilities.
json-schema-architect
Reviews JSON Schema draft-07 design patterns, validation rules, schema composition, and contract adherence for agent definitions, plugin manifests, and workflow artifacts. Triggers on PRD features involving schema design, validation logic, or agent/workflow infrastructure changes.
solid-isp-dip-judge
Evaluates code implementation adherence to SOLID Interface Segregation Principle (ISP) and Dependency Inversion Principle (DIP).
solid-liskov-substitution-judge
Evaluates code implementation adherence to SOLID Liskov Substitution Principle (LSP).
ssot-judge
Evaluates implementation plans for SSOT (Single Source of Truth) violations.
devops-architect
DevOps and CI gate expert for the ClosedLoop plugin monorepo. Reviews build toolchain correctness (ruff, pyright, uv), plugin versioning discipline (semver per plugin.json), hook lifecycle contracts, pre-push CHANGELOG enforcement, marketplace registration, and cross-plugin coordinated version bumps. Triggers on…