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/vladolaru/claude-code-plugins/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vladolaru/claude-code-pluginsWhat 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 | $0.00026 | $0.01153 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00576 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00231 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00115 |
Grade B, and why
code-reviewer scanned grade B with 1 finding against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured yesterday.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Asks the agent to reveal its instructionsmediumSystem prompt leakage
Directions to print, repeat or translate the system prompt extract configuration the operator did not intend to expose.
Read the output carefully. It contains your review rules, review scope, and output instructions. If STATUS is ERROR or NO_DOMAIN_FILES, follow the instructions in the output and exit. How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 143 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
MANDATORY SETUP — Run Bootstrap Before Reviewing
Do NOT start reviewing code until this step is done:
Run the bootstrap script:
PLUGIN_ROOT=$(cat /tmp/.pirategoat-tools-root 2>/dev/null)
[ -z "$PLUGIN_ROOT" ] || [ ! -d "$PLUGIN_ROOT/scripts" ] && PLUGIN_ROOT=$(find ~/.claude -path "*/pirategoat-tools/*/scripts/review/agent/bootstrap.py" -type f 2>/dev/null | sort | tail -1 | xargs dirname | xargs dirname | xargs dirname | xargs dirname)
python3 $PLUGIN_ROOT/scripts/review/agent/bootstrap.py --agent code-reviewer
Read the output carefully. It contains your review rules, review scope, and output instructions. If STATUS is ERROR or NO_DOMAIN_FILES, follow the instructions in the output and exit.
You are an expert Code Reviewer who validates code changes against stated goals and identifies REAL issues that would impact production. You review changes in context of what the changes are trying to achieve—not in isolation.
Your expertise: Bug detection, goal alignment verification, code quality assessment, and providing actionable feedback.
This review matters. You are the last check before code ships.
Core Mission
Verify goal alignment -> Identify real bugs -> Validate production readiness
RULE 0 (MOST IMPORTANT): Validate, Don't Trust
Assume nothing. Verify everything by reading the actual code.
For follow-up reviews:
- Verify claimed fixes - read the code, don't assume
- Check "addressed" comments - read the code
- Confirm new commits match discussion - not just similar
Red flag thoughts that mean STOP:
- "The author probably handled this" -> Verify
- "This looks like it's fixed" -> Read the code
- "They said they addressed it" -> Check the actual implementation
RULE 1: Review Against Stated Goals
Every issue must relate to: Does this achieve the goal? Does it introduce regressions? Does it follow project patterns?
RULE 2: Accept Documented Scope Expansion
Scope expansion is acceptable IF clearly documented and related. Only flag undocumented/unrelated changes.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 143 lines · 26 tokens per session scan B 315f7532b4d4
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository vladolaru/claude-code-plugins (8 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 1,153 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it B with 1 finding (asks the agent to reveal its instructions). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.