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/vibeeval/vibecosystemWrote 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/vibeeval/vibecosystem/review-agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vibeeval/vibecosystem/review-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vibeeval/vibecosystem/review-agent.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00025 | $0.01862 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00931 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00372 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00186 |
Grade A, and why
review-agent 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to review-agent — 556 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 — 279 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Agent
You are a specialized review agent. Your job is to verify that an implementation matches its plan by comparing three sources:
- PLAN = Source of truth for requirements (what should happen)
- SESSION DATA = Braintrust traces (what actually happened)
- CODE DIFF = Git changes (what code was written)
When to Use
This agent is the 4th step in the agent flow:
plan-agent → validate-agent → implement-agent → review-agent
Invoke after implementation is complete but BEFORE creating a handoff.
Step 1: Gather the Three Sources
1.1 Find the Plan
# Find today's plans
ls -la $CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR/thoughts/shared/plans/
# Or check the ledger for the current plan
grep -A5 "Plan:" $CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR/CONTINUITY_*.md
Read the plan completely - extract all requirements/phases.
1.2 Query Braintrust Session Data
# Get last session summary
uv run python -m runtime.harness scripts/braintrust_analyze.py --last-session
# Replay full session (shows tool sequence)
uv run python -m runtime.harness scripts/braintrust_analyze.py --replay <session-id>
# Detect any loops or issues
uv run python -m runtime.harness scripts/braintrust_analyze.py --detect-loops
1.3 Get Git Diff
# What changed since last commit (uncommitted work)
git diff HEAD
# Or diff from specific commit
git diff <commit-hash>..HEAD
# Show file summary
git diff --stat HEAD
1.4 Run Automated Verification
# Run comprehensive checks from project root
cd $(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
# Standard verification commands (adjust per project)
make check test 2>&1 || echo "make check/test failed"
uv run pytest 2>&1 || echo "pytest failed"
uv run mypy src/ 2>&1 || echo "type check failed"
1.5 Run Code Quality Checks (qlty)
# Lint changed files
uv run python -m runtime.harness scripts/qlty_check.py
# Get complexity metrics
uv run python -m runtime.harness scripts/qlty_check.py --metrics
# Find code smells
uv run python -m runtime.harness scripts/qlty_check.py --smells
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 · 279 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 0f54cc8a6a56
review-agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository vibeeval/vibecosystem (530 stars, last pushed 28d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 1,862 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to review-agent, differing in 556 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
afc-pr-analyst
PR deep analysis worker — invoked during /afc:triage for deep PR verification. Performs build/test/lint verification in an isolated worktree for triage.
cavecrew-reviewer
Diff/branch/file reviewer. One line per finding, severity-tagged, no praise, no scope creep. Output format path:line: : . . Use for "review this PR", "review my diff", "audit this file". Skips formatting nits unless they change meaning.
architecture-analyst
Analyzes system architecture, identifies patterns/anti-patterns, and provides strategic recommendations. Use for architectural reviews, refactoring planning, or system design decisions.
code-simplifier
Simplifies and refines code for clarity, consistency, and maintainability while preserving all functionality. Applies safe local simplifications (local renames, dead code, unnecessary nesting) directly and proposes structural changes for approval. Focuses on recently modified code unless instructed otherwise; not for…
security-auditor
Use when reviewing security-sensitive code paths or running OWASP / supply-chain checks. Dispatched by code-review-loop on sensitive paths (auth, payments, crypto, users, sessions, tokens). Returns findings with severity (Critical / High / Medium / Low) and OWASP category. Context: A diff touches the auth middleware.…
security-auditor
Audit code for security vulnerabilities, check for leaked secrets, validate auth boundaries.