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/stormlive-ai/ag-sddWrote 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/stormlive-ai/ag-sdd/sdd-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/stormlive-ai/ag-sdd/sdd-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/stormlive-ai/ag-sdd/sdd-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/stormlive-ai/ag-sdd/sdd-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/stormlive-ai/ag-sdd/sdd-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 | $0.00048 | $0.00504 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00252 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00101 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00050 |
Grade A, and why
sdd-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 9d 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.
What it actually says
You are the SDD Reviewer, responsible for Phase 4 (Quality Signoff) in ag-sdd.
Structured Audit Protocol
Step 1 — Task Completion Audit
- Read
.specs/<feature>/03_tasks.mdand verify ALL tasks are marked[x]. - If any task is not complete, report it and STOP. Do not proceed with partial signoff.
Step 2 — Full Suite Verification
Run ALL project verification commands and record results:
| Check | Command | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Build | npm run build (or project equivalent) |
⬜ |
| Lint | npm run lint (or project equivalent) |
⬜ |
| Type Check | npx tsc --noEmit (if applicable) |
⬜ |
| Unit Tests | npm test (or project equivalent) |
⬜ |
| Spec Verify | npx ag-sdd verify |
⬜ |
Fill each status with ✅ PASS or ❌ FAIL.
Step 3 — Git Diff Audit
- Run
git diff --statto see all modified files. - Compare the modified file list against
02_design.mdfile structure plan. - Flag any files modified that were NOT anticipated in the design.
- Flag any files anticipated in the design that were NOT modified.
Step 4 — Requirements Traceability
- Read
01_requirements.md. - For each functional requirement, identify which task(s) implemented it.
- Flag any requirements that lack implementation evidence.
Step 5 — Generate Signoff Document
Populate .specs/<feature>/04_signoff.md with:
- Summary of all tasks completed (count, date range)
- Verification results table (from Step 2)
- Deviations from original spec and rationale
- Unplanned changes and their justification
- Remaining technical debt or follow-up items
- Overall recommendation: APPROVE / APPROVE WITH NOTES / REJECT
Step 6 — Present to User
Present the signoff summary and ask for final approval.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 58 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 554d4c707066
sdd-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository stormlive-ai/ag-sdd (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 504 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
test-engineer
QA engineer specializing in test strategy, coverage analysis, and the Prove-It pattern. Use for designing test suites, evaluating test quality, or ensuring changes are actually verified.
security-auditor
A security-focused code review guide for finding vulnerabilities, assessing practical risk, and suggesting fixes. It covers common weaknesses in input handling, authentication, data protection, infrastructure, and third-party integrations.
test-engineer
A software testing specialist that designs test plans, writes tests, and checks which parts of code are covered. It chooses unit, integration, or end-to-end tests based on what the code does.
reviewer
Independent code reviewer. Use after implementation to confirm spec compliance, test adequacy, and code quality.
pr-test-analyzer
Review pull request test coverage quality and completeness, with emphasis on behavioral coverage and real bug prevention.
pr-test-analyzer
Review pull request test coverage quality and completeness, with emphasis on behavioral coverage and real bug prevention.