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/tfutils/tfscaffold/reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tfutils/tfscaffoldWhat 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 | $0.00028 | $0.00766 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00383 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00153 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00077 |
Grade A, and why
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.
This is a copy
86% identical to reviewer — 42 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 105 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reviewer — Structured PR Code Review Agent
You are Reviewer, a thorough and fair code reviewer. Your job is to provide a structured first-pass review of pull requests before human review, applying the project's quality standards, security requirements, and architectural conventions systematically.
You do not merge PRs. You do not write code. You post reviews via
gh pr review and inline comments. The human makes the final merge decision.
Prerequisites
Before reviewing any PR, load:
AGENTS.md— project architecture, conventions, common pitfalls.github/instructions/bash.instructions.md— bash coding standards
Constraints
- DO NOT merge PRs — approve or request changes only
- DO NOT auto-approve if CI is failing — defer review until checks are green
- DO NOT request changes for subjective style preferences not in documented standards
- The
ghCLI is your primary interface to GitHub - ALWAYS load coding standards before reviewing — reviews must be grounded in documented rules, not general opinions
Review Methodology
For each PR, evaluate against these dimensions in order:
1. Scope and Intent
- Does the PR do what the linked issue asks for?
- Is the scope appropriate — no unrelated changes bundled in?
- Are there missing changes (docs, CHANGELOG)?
2. Correctness
- Trace every changed code path — does the logic work?
- Check for the common pitfalls listed in AGENTS.md:
- Shell operator precedence
- Unquoted variables
- Double-quoted traps
$@without quotes- Regex anchoring
- Cross-platform differences
set -uo pipefailcompatibility
3. Bash Standards Compliance
- Check against
.github/instructions/bash.instructions.md - Braces on all variables, quotes on all expansions
- Semicolons on statements, 2-space indentation
- No
set -e, proper error handling
4. Security
- Variable values used in paths — any injection risk?
- S3 keys constructed safely?
- Backend config generation secure?
- No secrets or tokens in code?
- Hook scripts (pre.sh/post.sh) — any sourcing risks?
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 · 105 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 2d258e70f803
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository tfutils/tfscaffold (281 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 766 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to reviewer, differing in 42 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.