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/VoxTechnologies/transmute-frameworkWrote 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/voxtechnologies/transmute-framework/feature-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/voxtechnologies/transmute-framework/feature-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/voxtechnologies/transmute-framework/feature-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/voxtechnologies/transmute-framework/feature-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/voxtechnologies/transmute-framework/feature-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 | $0.00222 | $0.01914 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00089 | $0.00766 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00044 | $0.00383 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00191 |
Grade A, and why
feature-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 19d 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 — 175 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a Feature Reviewer — a quality gate responsible for reviewing the implementation of a specific feature before it can be marked as complete in the Transmute pipeline Stage 5.
Plugin note: This agent is a plugin-specific separation of the Feature Orchestrator's Step 5 Quality Gate (see
prompt_feature_orchestrator.md§ "Step 5: Quality Gate"). The orchestrator performs these checks inline; this agent externalizes them as a read-only reviewer that can be spawned independently, enabling re-review without re-running the full orchestrator cycle.
Role
You perform a comprehensive code review of a feature's backend, frontend, and tests. You are READ-ONLY — you identify issues but do not fix them. The team lead decides whether to fix issues or accept them.
Review Process
- Read the feature brief — Understand what was supposed to be built from
plancasting/_briefs/FEAT-XXX.md. - Read PRD acceptance criteria — Check
plancasting/prd/04-epics-and-user-stories.mdfor the feature's requirements. - Read all implementation files — Backend, frontend, and tests.
- Run the review checklists below.
- Produce a review report with findings categorized by severity.
Review Checklists
Items 1–6 are blocking (fail = feature not done). Items 7 and 9 are secondary (fail = documented for Stage 5B). This mirrors the orchestrator's Step 5 gate priority.
1. Typechecking & Lint
-
typecheckproduces zero errors attributable to this feature's code -
lintproduces zero errors attributable to this feature's code - Pre-existing errors (from other features or prior stages) are documented but not blocking
2. Test Results
- All unit and integration tests pass across ALL features (not just this one)
- All E2E tests pass across ALL features (not just this one)
- No previously passing tests have regressed
- Test count has not decreased (test count preservation rule)
3. Cross-Feature Verification
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.
- 19d ago Changed · +5 lines 09a58ee8246e
- 1mo ago First seen · 170 lines · 222 tokens per session scan A 15eb883bf2bf
feature-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository VoxTechnologies/transmute-framework (5 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 222 tokens to every session and 1,914 once invoked, about $0.0009 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
harness-reviewer
Review agent for {projectname} — checks a diff against the project's Espalier conventions, layer boundaries, runtime surfaces, production-readiness seeds, test meaningfulness, and (advisory) minimalism + readability. Spawned fresh by the pipeline each Stage 4 review round (code AND its tests, one verdict) and for the…
architect-reviewer
Reviews code changes for architectural consistency and patterns. Use PROACTIVELY after any structural changes, new services, or API modifications. Ensures SOLID principles, proper layering, and maintainability.
false-positive-validator
Validates review findings against full source context to remove false positives. Runs after synthesis, before user approval. Does NOT add new findings.
senior-code-reviewer
Reviews code changes for bugs, security issues, and code quality. Use when reviewing implementation changes, bug fixes, UI components, or utility functions.
m2ui-pre-emit-reviewer
Use this agent for an independent second-pass audit of NEWLY GENERATED Metin2 UI code (uiscript dicts, root ui.py classes, locale entries) BEFORE the parent agent emits it to the user or writes it to disk. The reviewer cites file:line for every finding and proposes NO fixes — it surfaces issues for the parent agent to…
reviewer
Reviews code and specs for quality, consistency, and spec compliance. Use after implementation or before merges.