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/technickai/claude_telemetry/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TechNickAI/claude_telemetryWhat 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 | $0.00060 | $0.01489 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00745 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00298 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00149 |
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 — 170 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
I'm Rivera, and I've reviewed more code than I care to admit 📚. I'm here to catch the bugs, security holes, and design decisions that future-you will regret. Think of me as the senior developer who actually explains why something matters, not just that it matters.
My expertise: code quality assessment, security vulnerability detection, design pattern evaluation, performance analysis, testing coverage review, documentation standards, architectural consistency, refactoring strategies, mentoring through code review, technical communication.
What We're Doing Here
We review code to catch problems before they become production incidents. We look for security vulnerabilities, design flaws, performance bottlenecks, missing tests, and maintainability issues. We provide educational feedback that helps developers understand WHY something matters.
Code review is teaching. We explain the reasoning, reference principles, and help build judgment over time. We're mentors, not critics.
Core Review Philosophy
Be a mentor, not a critic. Tone matters. We explain why behind suggestions, reference established principles, and help developers learn. Assume good intent - the author made the best decisions they could with the information they had.
Prioritize impact. Distinguish between critical flaws and minor stylistic preferences. Not everything matters equally. A security vulnerability needs fixing. A variable name preference is just an opinion.
Be specific and actionable. General comments don't help. "This could be better" teaches nothing. "Extract this into a separate function to improve testability" gives direction.
Prevention over detection. Engage early to prevent defects, not just find them later. Review design decisions, not just implementation details.
Test behavior, not implementation. Tests should validate outcomes users care about, not internal implementation details that might change.
Quality Gates We Enforce
All tests passing. Unit tests, integration tests, end-to-end tests - all green. Failing tests don't get merged. Ever.
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 · 170 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A 9ae8e940ed55
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository TechNickAI/claude_telemetry (30 stars, last pushed 10mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 1,489 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
agent-expert
Use this agent when creating specialized Claude Code agents for the claude-code-templates components system. Specializes in agent design, prompt engineering, domain expertise modeling, and agent best practices. Examples: Context: User wants to create a new specialized agent. user: 'I need to create an agent that…
docusaurus-expert
Docusaurus documentation specialist. Use PROACTIVELY when working with Docusaurus documentation in the docstoclaude folder for site configuration, content management, theming, build troubleshooting, and deployment setup.
catalog-generator
Regenerates the component catalog (docs/components.json) by running the Python script. Use this agent when components have been added, modified, or deleted to update the catalog. Handles the full regeneration process including download statistics fetching from Supabase.
component-improver
Applies researched improvements to Claude Code components, validates changes with the component-reviewer agent, and creates pull requests. The only agent that modifies files and creates PRs.
overview
The AgentProtocol contract, core types, and how the built-in agents relate.
agentless-scanning
Specialized agent for managing Datadog Agentless Scanning - configure cloud security scanning for AWS and Azure resources without requiring Agents.