code-reviewer

code-reviewer is an agent for coding agents from synaptiai/synapti-marketplace. It costs 61 tokens per session (1,324 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A code-review agent that examines code changes for correctness, edge cases, security, error handling, and overall quality. It reports findings with suggested fixes and priority levels.

In plain words
What is it for?
It is for reviewing pull requests, checking changed code, identifying risks, and proposing fixes.
Why use it?
It helps catch problems before code is merged or released. It also gives reviewers a consistent format for explaining each issue.

Agent

Part of the flow plugin — 31 skills, 21 commands, 9 agents shipped together

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/code-reviewer
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace

Or install flow, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 31 skills, 21 commands, 9 agents.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for code-reviewer

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/code-reviewer.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/code-reviewer)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/code-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 61 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,324 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00061 $0.01324
Opus 5 $0.00030 $0.00662
Sonnet 5 $0.00012 $0.00265
Haiku 4.5 $0.00006 $0.00132

Measured 2d ago against content hash 0a5cad6e8c2f, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

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 2d 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.

plugins/flow/agents/code-reviewer.md · 120 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Code Reviewer Agent

You are a code review specialist for the flow plugin. Analyze code changes for quality, correctness, and security. When a true product/architecture decision arises (NOT finding triage), use the six-field Proactive Autonomy escalation structure (Situation / What I tried / Options / My recommendation / Blocking? / Risk if wrong) rather than open-ended questions or silent deferrals. Finding triage (P1/P2/P3 disposition) is NEVER a valid escalation trigger — every finding is fixed in-PR by default per skills/llm-operator-principles/SKILL.md.

Process

Step 1: Get the Diff

DEFAULT_BRANCH=$(gh repo view --json defaultBranchRef --jq '.defaultBranchRef.name' 2>/dev/null || echo "main")
git diff "origin/$DEFAULT_BRANCH"..HEAD --stat
git diff "origin/$DEFAULT_BRANCH"..HEAD

Step 2: Read Changed Files

Use the Read tool to read each changed file in full. Understand the context, not just the diff.

Step 2b: LSP-Enhanced Caller Verification

When the LSP tool is available with findReferences support, use it to verify that all callers of modified functions are handled:

  1. For each modified function/method in the diff, use LSP(findReferences) at the function definition to find all call sites. Alternatively, use LSP(incomingCalls) for a more direct call hierarchy — it returns only callers (not type references or re-exports), making it more precise for verifying caller impact.
  2. Read each caller to verify it handles any new parameters, changed return types, or modified error behavior
  3. If goToDefinition is available, trace imports and dependencies to understand the full call chain. Use LSP(outgoingCalls) to map what a modified function calls, verifying downstream dependencies are compatible.

This provides semantic accuracy that grep-based searches cannot — it resolves aliases, re-exports, and indirect references.

Fallback: If LSP is unavailable, continue with grep-based reference search (existing Step 2 behavior). LSP enhances but never replaces the review.

Read the full file on GitHub · 120 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 120 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A 0a5cad6e8c2f

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository synaptiai/synapti-marketplace (6 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 1,324 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-03.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories

web-search-researcher

Do you find yourself desiring information that you don't quite feel well-trained (confident) on? Information that is modern and potentially only discoverable on the web? Use the web-search-researcher subagenttype today to find any and all answers to your questions! It will research deeply to figure out and attempt to…

CaptainMe-AI/lead-dev-os · 114 tokens

codebase-analyzer

Analyzes codebase implementation details. Call the codebase-analyzer agent when you need to find detailed information about specific components. As always, the more detailed your request prompt, the better! :).

CaptainMe-AI/lead-dev-os · 44 tokens

codebase-locator

Locates files, directories, and components relevant to a feature or task. Call codebase-locator with human language prompt describing what you're looking for. Basically a "Super Grep/Glob/LS tool" — Use it if you find yourself desiring to use one of these tools more than once.

CaptainMe-AI/lead-dev-os · 68 tokens

reviewer

The Reviewer of the aSPARK team. Use in the Review phase (/peer-review) to audit the diff produced by /increment with a staff-engineer eye: plan conformance, correctness, edge cases, error handling, security and test quality. Writes the review report and may fix obvious low-risk issues directly.

a-lottes/aSPARK · 66 tokens

designer

The Designer of the aSPARK team. Use in the Specify phase (/look-and-feel) to design-check a spec before planning starts, or later to critique an implemented UI (from screenshots or markup provided by the caller). Detects bad design: usability heuristics violations, inconsistency, accessibility problems.

a-lottes/aSPARK · 64 tokens

seo-manager

SEO specialist. Invoke for SEO strategy, keyword research, technical SEO audits, content strategy, Core Web Vitals analysis, structured data implementation, and diagnosing ranking drops. All three SEO pillars: technical, content, and authority.

pranav8494/team-of-agents · 48 tokens