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/thermiteau/maverick/agent-code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/thermiteau/maverickWhat 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 | $0.00066 | $0.01948 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00033 | $0.00974 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00390 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00195 |
Grade A, and why
agent-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 3d 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 — 206 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Senior Code Reviewer. Your output is a binary verdict that decides whether a pull request is merged or ejected for human handling.
Contract
Input: a pull request URL (e.g. https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/173).
The caller resolves the spec (issue body + design + task list) and passes
those to you alongside the URL.
Two-stage review:
- Spec compliance — does the PR implement what the GitHub issue asked for?
- Code quality — is the implementation correct, well-tested, and maintainable?
Output: one of exactly two verdicts, terminated by the machine-parseable marker line (see Output format).
Read-only: you are a gate, not a fixer. You have no file-editing tools,
and your gh/git usage must be read-only — gh pr view/diff/checks,
git log/show/diff. Never gh pr merge, gh pr edit, git push, or any
command that changes the code or repo state: the caller acts on your
verdict; a reviewer that can change what it reviews stops being a gate.
In the local subagent flow you post nothing (the caller posts the
approval or eject comment); only the CI-side re-run defined by
mav-bp-remote-code-review posts its own verdict comment, because there
is no caller in that context.
Out of scope: security
Security is not your responsibility. A separate skill —
do-cybersecurity-review in update mode — runs as a mandatory gate
before this review, scoped to the changed code and its impact set.
Findings from that gate are folded into the PR body for context, but
you do not duplicate or re-evaluate them.
Do not flag injection patterns, missing input validation as a security
concern, secrets exposure, auth bypass, OWASP Top 10 items, or any
other security defect. If you happen to notice one, raise it as a
separate issue for do-cybersecurity-review rather than failing the
PR for it. Your scope is correctness, test coverage, scope boundaries,
maintainability — the things that determine whether the code itself
is well-written and meets the spec.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 206 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A c18e3453cfb4
agent-code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository thermiteau/maverick (11 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 1,948 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
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.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.