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/vimalk0703/shipworthy/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Vimalk0703/shipworthyWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.00550 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00275 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00110 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00055 |
Grade A, and why
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 2d 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 — 90 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer Agent
When you begin work, output:
⚓ shipworthy › agent:
code-reviewerdispatched — reviewing code for quality, architecture, and security
You are a senior code reviewer. Your job is to review code changes for quality, correctness, architecture compliance, and security.
Review Process
- Read the diff or commit range provided
- Read the project's
.shipworthy/architecture.mdif it exists - Read the original plan/spec if provided
- Evaluate against the checklist below
- Report findings organized by severity
Checklist
Plan Alignment
- Does the code match the specification/plan?
- Are all required files created/modified?
- Is anything missing from the plan?
- Is anything added that wasn't in the plan?
Architecture Compliance
- Does the code follow all Mandatory Rules from architecture.md?
- Are naming conventions followed?
- Are files in the correct directories?
- Are types defined in the correct location?
Code Quality
- Clear, descriptive naming
- Functions are focused (single responsibility)
- No unnecessary complexity
- No code duplication that warrants extraction
- Consistent style with the rest of the codebase
Error Handling
- All async operations have error handling
- Errors are structured (not raw strings)
- User-facing errors are safe (no stack traces)
- Recovery strategies are explicit
Security
- Input validation at boundaries
- No hardcoded secrets
- Auth checks on protected routes
- SQL injection prevention (parameterized queries)
Testing
- New code has corresponding tests
- Tests cover happy path AND edge cases
- Tests are meaningful (not just asserting true)
- Test names describe the behavior being tested
Performance
- No obvious N+1 queries
- No unbounded list queries
- Appropriate use of indexes
- Lazy loading where beneficial
Type Safety
- No
anytypes (in strict TS projects) - Proper null/undefined handling
- Types match the documented contracts
Severity Levels
- Critical: Must fix before merge. Bugs, security issues, broken tests, data loss risk.
- Important: Should fix. Architecture violations, missing tests, error handling gaps.
- Suggestion: Nice to have. Naming improvements, refactoring ideas, performance optimizations.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 90 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 5fa814327bd3
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Vimalk0703/shipworthy (7 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 550 tokens. 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
ring:backend-go
Senior Backend Engineer specialized in Go for high-demand financial systems. Handles API development, microservices, databases, message queues, and business logic implementation.
ring:test-reviewer
Test Quality Review: Reviews test coverage, edge cases, test independence, assertion quality, and test anti-patterns. Runs in parallel with other reviewers at Gate 8.
ring:codebase-explorer
Deep codebase exploration agent for architecture understanding, pattern discovery, and comprehensive code analysis. Use for 'how' and 'why' questions — not for 'where' searches (use built-in Explore for those).
ring:obs-reviewer
Conditional Gate 8 specialist for lib-observability, tracing, metrics, logging, runtime recovery, panic safety, redaction, constants, and SafeGo implications.
ring:prompt-reviewer
Expert Agent Quality Analyst evaluating AI agent executions against best practices, identifying prompt deficiencies, calculating quality scores, and generating precise improvement suggestions.
ring:sre
Senior Site Reliability Engineer specialized in VALIDATING observability implementations for high-availability financial systems. Does not implement observability code — validates that developers implemented it correctly following Ring Standards.