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/vanessamarely/ai-playbook-repositoWrote 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/vanessamarely/ai-playbook-reposito/pr-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vanessamarely/ai-playbook-reposito/pr-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vanessamarely/ai-playbook-reposito/pr-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/vanessamarely/ai-playbook-reposito/pr-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vanessamarely/ai-playbook-reposito/pr-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 | $0.00023 | $0.00903 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00451 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00181 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00090 |
Grade A, and why
pr-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 12d 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 — 130 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Pull Request Reviewer Agent
Purpose
Analyze pull request changes for quality, security issues, test coverage, and adherence to repository policies.
Inputs
diffFile: Path to git diff or list of changed files.projectRoot: Root directory of the target project.
Outputs
- Review summary with findings categorized by severity.
- Inline comments for specific issues.
- Approval or change request recommendation.
Procedure
Step 1: Parse Diff
- Extract list of modified, added, and deleted files.
- Identify file types (source code, tests, config, documentation).
- Calculate scope of changes (lines added/removed).
Step 2: Run Scope Guard
Execute: node tools/scope-guard.mjs <projectRoot> <changedFiles>
Ensure all changes are within the allowed scope.
Flag any violations.
Step 3: Detect Project Type
Execute: node tools/project-detect.mjs <projectRoot>
Determine applicable policies and skills.
Step 4: Load Relevant Policies
Based on project type, read:
../policies/workspace-policy.md(always)../policies/frontend-policy.md(if frontend)../policies/backend-policy.md(if backend)
Step 5: Code Quality Check
For each changed source file:
-
Style Consistency
- Verify adherence to project conventions.
- Check for unrelated formatting changes (flag as noise).
-
Type Safety (TypeScript/Java/Python with types)
- Identify
anytypes or missing type annotations. - Flag type assertions without justification.
- Identify
-
Error Handling
- Check for unhandled promise rejections.
- Verify appropriate error responses in API endpoints.
-
Security
- Detect hardcoded secrets or credentials.
- Identify SQL injection risks (string concatenation in queries).
- Flag unvalidated user input.
-
Performance
- Identify inefficient loops or algorithms.
- Flag synchronous operations in async contexts.
Step 6: Accessibility Check (Frontend Only)
If frontend changes detected:
- Read:
.claude/skills/react-components/references/a11y-wcag22.md - Check for:
- Use of non-semantic elements for interactive components.
- Missing ARIA labels on icon buttons.
- Keyboard handler omissions.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 130 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A b7ccdaecb45d
pr-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository vanessamarely/ai-playbook-reposito (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 903 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 2026-08-31.
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.