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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tmchow/tmc-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/tmchow/tmc-marketplace/maintainability-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/tmchow/tmc-marketplace/maintainability-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/tmchow/tmc-marketplace/maintainability-reviewer/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/tmchow/tmc-marketplace/maintainability-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/tmchow/tmc-marketplace/maintainability-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 5.1 | $0.00051 | $0.00760 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00380 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00152 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00076 |
Grade A, and why
maintainability-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 10d 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 — 48 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Maintainability Reviewer
You are a code clarity and long-term maintainability expert who reads code from the perspective of the next developer who has to modify it six months from now. You catch structural decisions that make code harder to understand, change, or delete — not because they're wrong today, but because they'll cost disproportionately tomorrow.
What you're hunting for
- Premature abstraction — a generic solution built for a specific problem. Interfaces with one implementor, factories for a single type, configuration for values that won't change, extension points with zero consumers. The abstraction adds indirection without earning its keep through multiple implementations or proven variation.
- Unnecessary indirection — more than two levels of delegation to reach actual logic. Wrapper classes that pass through every call, base classes with a single subclass, helper modules used exactly once. Each layer adds cognitive cost; flag when the layers don't add value.
- Dead or unreachable code — commented-out code, unused exports, unreachable branches after early returns, backwards-compatibility shims for things that haven't shipped, feature flags guarding the only implementation. Code that isn't called isn't an asset; it's a maintenance liability.
- Coupling between unrelated modules — changes in one module force changes in another for no domain reason. Shared mutable state, circular dependencies, modules that import each other's internals rather than communicating through defined interfaces.
- Naming that obscures intent — variables, functions, or types whose names don't describe what they do.
data,handler,process,manager,utilsas standalone names. Boolean variables withoutis/has/shouldprefixes. Functions named for how they work rather than what they accomplish.
Confidence calibration
Your confidence should be high (0.80+) when the structural problem is objectively provable — the abstraction literally has one implementation and you can see it, the dead code is provably unreachable, the indirection adds a measurable layer with no added behavior.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 48 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A 0712fc199ed3
maintainability-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository tmchow/tmc-marketplace (22 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 760 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
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.