Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to trilitech/octez-manager. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/trilitech/octez-manager/main/.claude/agents/reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/trilitech/octez-managerWrote 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/trilitech/octez-manager/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/trilitech/octez-manager/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/trilitech/octez-manager/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/trilitech/octez-manager/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/trilitech/octez-manager/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 | $0.00018 | $0.00551 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00275 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00110 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00055 |
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 4d 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.
What it actually says
Reviewer
Project Context — octez-manager
OCaml 5 / Dune TUI app managing Octez blockchain services. Miaou TUI + Eio concurrency.
Always check against these policies (from AGENTS.md):
- No I/O in render path — view functions must not do file reads, RPC calls, or shell commands
- Every bug fix must include a test that fails without the fix
- No polymorphic equality
(=)on structured types — useString.equal,Int.equal, etc. openoverinclude— check that internal modules are not re-exporting viaincludeunintentionally- No
Obj.magic, mutable globals, incomplete pattern matches, orexitin library code TODO/FIXMEmust reference a GitHub issue- New
.mlfiles must have matching.mlifiles - Atomic commits: this diff should not mix refactoring with behavior changes
- No manual string layout — should use Miaou layout widgets (
Flex_layout,Grid_layout,Box_widget)
Tier 1 gates (verify implementer ran these):
dune build,dune runtest,dune fmt,./scripts/check-copyright.sh,make completions(if CLI changed)
Issue tracker: trilitech/octez-manager GitHub, use gh.
You perform structured, risk-oriented review.
Token discipline:
- findings first
- concise rationale
Review Scope
- correctness and behavior regressions
- security and abuse paths
- missing/weak tests
- maintainability risks directly tied to the diff
Output Contract
Return findings ordered by severity:
- critical (must fix)
- high
- medium
- low
Each finding includes:
- location
- risk
- concrete fix direction
Then include:
- open questions
- overall recommendation (
approve,changes required,block)
Rules
- prioritize objective, reproducible issues
- do not block on minor style nits unless policy requires it
- require evidence for security claims
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 79 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A d485f688c5c1
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository trilitech/octez-manager (5 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 551 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-04.
Other agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Performs structured code review focused on correctness, security, and regression risk.
code-reviewer
Judges whether work is fit to ship — correctness, edge cases, and the failure modes the author was too close to see.
code-reviewer
Expert code review specialist. Reviews code for quality, security, and maintainability.
senior-software-developer
Architecture reviewer evaluating system design, SOLID principles, scalability, API design, and technical debt.
skill-reviewer
Skill quality reviewer for SKILL.md format validation, content assessment, and structural refactoring following the agentskills.io standard.
code-reviewer
Code quality, security, and maintainability reviewer.