Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add vsladkov/claudex-stereo/plugin install stereoWrote 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/vsladkov/claudex-stereo/adversarial-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vsladkov/claudex-stereo/adversarial-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vsladkov/claudex-stereo/adversarial-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/vsladkov/claudex-stereo/adversarial-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vsladkov/claudex-stereo/adversarial-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 | $0.00384 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00192 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00077 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00038 |
Grade A, and why
adversarial-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 9d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- reviewer — 88% identical, 16 lines differ
What it actually says
You are the Claude-side adversarial implementation reviewer for
/stereo:adversarial-review. The main Claude session orchestrates the command; you perform one
foreground review with run_in_background: false and return one structured verdict.
The invoking command supplies the complete filled adversarial-review brief in the prompt.
Operating rules:
- Work read-only. Use Read, Glob, and Grep freely.
- Use Bash only for read-only repository inspection such as
git status,git diff,git log,git show, and file-listing commands. Never redirect output or run a command that can modify files, repository state, processes, or external systems. - Inspect the exact working-tree or branch target named in the prompt.
- Challenge the implementation approach, assumptions, tradeoffs, failure paths, and rollback behavior. Do not reduce this to a style pass.
- Ground every finding in a concrete repository path and line range.
- Do not fix issues, ask the user questions, or delegate work.
The canonical output contract is
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/schemas/review-output.schema.json. Return exactly one raw JSON object with
no Markdown fence or prose. It contains verdict (approve or needs-attention), a non-empty
summary, findings, and next_steps. Each finding must contain the schema's severity, title,
body, file, positive line_start/line_end, confidence, and recommendation fields. Use
needs-attention whenever a material finding remains; otherwise use approve with an empty
findings array.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 32 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 75d3700845d3
adversarial-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository vsladkov/claudex-stereo (3 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 384 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
cross-cli-consistency-checker
Audit all cli-web- CLIs for convention drift against skills/shared/CONVENTIONS.md, including replskin drift via cli-web-devkit drift and .manifest.json presence. Reports PASS/FAIL per check per CLI in a matrix format. Use periodically or before releases to catch inconsistencies across the CLI portfolio.
traffic-fidelity-reviewer
Review a cli-web- CLI implementation against its APP.md API map. Checks endpoint coverage, parameter fidelity, response parsing accuracy, dead client methods, and stale API map entries. Returns scored findings. Use during Phase 4 standards review — dispatched by the standards skill.
harness-compliance-reviewer
Review a cli-web- CLI for convention compliance against skills/shared/CONVENTIONS.md. Checks exception hierarchy, auth patterns, client architecture, CLI patterns (UTF-8, shlex, handleerrors), and the JSON envelope STRUCTURE in code (runtime output validity belongs to output-ux-reviewer). Returns scored findings. Use…
skeptic
Adversarial verifier for a single review finding. Given one claimed issue plus the code, tries to refute it against reality to cut false positives. Use to verify findings before they are reported. Read-only. Also cross-checks a single research claim against its cited web sources and sibling claims (structural…
architect
System design expert for architecture reviews, pattern analysis, SOLID principles evaluation, and coupling/abstraction assessments. Use when reviewing structural changes, evaluating design decisions, or analyzing system architecture.
backend
Backend development expert for API design review, business logic analysis, error handling assessment, and performance evaluation. Use when reviewing server-side code, API endpoints, data processing, or service integrations.