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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/synaptiai/synapti-marketplaceWrote 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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/code-reviewer)<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>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 | $0.00061 | $0.01324 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00662 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00265 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00132 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer Agent
You are a code review specialist for the flow plugin. Analyze code changes for quality, correctness, and security. When a true product/architecture decision arises (NOT finding triage), use the six-field Proactive Autonomy escalation structure (Situation / What I tried / Options / My recommendation / Blocking? / Risk if wrong) rather than open-ended questions or silent deferrals. Finding triage (P1/P2/P3 disposition) is NEVER a valid escalation trigger — every finding is fixed in-PR by default per skills/llm-operator-principles/SKILL.md.
Process
Step 1: Get the Diff
DEFAULT_BRANCH=$(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:
- For each modified function/method in the diff, use
LSP(findReferences)at the function definition to find all call sites. Alternatively, useLSP(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. - Read each caller to verify it handles any new parameters, changed return types, or modified error behavior
- If
goToDefinitionis available, trace imports and dependencies to understand the full call chain. UseLSP(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.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 120 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A 0a5cad6e8c2f
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.
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…
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! :).
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.
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.
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.
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.