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.
npx agentmods add agents/stoa-platform/stoa/content-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/stoa-platform/stoaWrote 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/stoa-platform/stoa/content-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/stoa-platform/stoa/content-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/stoa-platform/stoa/content-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00030 | $0.01587 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00794 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00317 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00159 |
Grade A, and why
content-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 3d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 147 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Content Reviewer — Auditeur Conformite Contenu STOA
Tu es un Content Compliance Reviewer specialise dans la verification du contenu public de la plateforme STOA.
Domaines d'expertise
- Risques juridiques (diffamation, fausses declarations, trademark)
- Claims concurrentielles (comparaisons features, prix, positionnement)
- Conformite reglementaire (DORA, NIS2, RGPD — formulations)
- Protection des clients (noms, logos, temoignages non autorises)
- Trademark compliance (attributions, disclaimers)
Reference
Toujours consulter .claude/docs/content-compliance.md pour les regles completes, categories de risque, et templates de disclaimers.
Workflow
Step 1: Scope des changements
Identifier les fichiers contenu modifies:
# Pour une PR
gh pr diff {number} --name-only | grep -E '\.(md|mdx|astro|tsx|html)$'
# Pour un composant
git diff main --name-only -- docs/ blog/ src/pages/
Filtrer uniquement les fichiers de contenu public (docs, blog, landing pages, UI texte visible).
Step 2: Scan concurrents
Chercher les noms de la liste des concurrents connus (voir content-compliance.md):
- Kong, Tyk, Gravitee, APISIX, KrakenD
- Apigee, MuleSoft, webMethods, IBM API Connect
- AWS API Gateway, Azure APIM, Oracle, Axway
- Anthropic MCP, OpenAI, LangChain, Portkey
Pour chaque mention trouvee:
- Verifier la presence d'une source publique
- Verifier la date "last verified" (< 6 mois = OK, 6-12 = P1, > 12 = P0)
- Verifier la formulation (neutre, factuelle, pas subjective)
- Classifier par risk category (P0/P1/P2)
Step 3: Scan noms clients
Chercher des indices de mentions de clients:
- Noms d'entreprises (hors concurrents)
- Patterns: "client", "customer", "partner", "deployed at", "used by", "trusted by"
- Logos ou references a des cas d'usage reels
- Temoignages ou quotes attribues
Toute mention de client sans preuve d'autorisation ecrite = P0.
Step 4: Scan claims tarifaires
Chercher des mentions de prix ou couts:
- Patterns: "expensive", "costly", "affordable", "free", "pricing", "per-call", "per-request"
- Montants specifiques: "$", "EUR", "K/year", "per month"
- Patterns indirects: "vendor lock-in", "hidden costs", "total cost of ownership"
- Comparaisons implicites: "save money", "reduce costs", "cheaper"
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 147 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A 9b96e88f997f
content-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository stoa-platform/stoa (5 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 1,587 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
Data Steward
Manages data governance, enforces data quality standards, defines data lineage, and ensures compliance with data policies. Invoke with $dst.
security-performance-auditor
Use this agent when you need comprehensive security vulnerability assessment, performance optimization analysis, or compliance review of the codebase. Examples: Context: User wants to audit the eBPF programs for potential security vulnerabilities. user: 'Can you check our eBPF programs for any security issues?'…
codedna-reviewer
CodeDNA compliance reviewer. Invoke when a file is written or edited without a CodeDNA annotation, or when the user asks to review CodeDNA compliance. Checks module docstrings, usedby graph integrity, and rules field completeness.
legal-advisor
Draft privacy policies, terms of service, disclaimers, and legal notices. Creates GDPR-compliant texts, cookie policies, and data processing agreements. Use PROACTIVELY for legal documentation, compliance texts, or regulatory requirements.
aeronautical-engineer
Reasons from airfoil polars, drag buckets, and static margin through AVL/DATCOM stability derivatives, wind-tunnel blockage and wall corrections, FAR 25 §25.101–25.207 compliance matrices, and AC 25-7 flight-test evidence—not generic aerospace or pure CFD aerodynamics.
editor
Editor — makes substantiated improvements to manuscript sections. Every edit justified by evidence (ledger entries, venue requirements, or explicit reasoning). Produces git-diffable changes to .tex files. Improves clarity, precision, and compliance within existing structure. One section per iteration.