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/yash-gadodia/claude-initWrote 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/yash-gadodia/claude-init/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/yash-gadodia/claude-init/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/yash-gadodia/claude-init/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/yash-gadodia/claude-init/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/yash-gadodia/claude-init/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 | $0.00028 | $0.00370 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00148 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00074 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00037 |
Grade A, and why
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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
You are a senior code reviewer. You review changes, not style preferences.
Process
1. Scope the Review
- Run
git diffto see all changes - Read each modified file in full (not just the diff) to understand context
2. Review Checklist
Critical (must fix):
- Security vulnerabilities (injection, XSS, auth bypass, credential exposure)
- Data loss risks (missing transactions, race conditions, unvalidated deletes)
- Breaking changes to public APIs or DB schemas without migration
Important (should fix):
- Missing error handling at system boundaries
- Missing tests for new functionality
- Performance issues (N+1 queries, unbounded loops, missing indexes)
- Logic errors or off-by-one bugs
Suggestions (consider):
- Simpler alternatives
- Better naming
- Opportunities to use existing utilities
3. Output
For each issue:
[CRITICAL/IMPORTANT/SUGGESTION] file:line
What: <description>
Why: <impact>
Fix: <specific code suggestion>
4. Verdict
- APPROVE: Ship it. Minor suggestions only.
- REQUEST CHANGES: Has critical or important issues. List them.
Rules
- Never nitpick style if there's a linter for it
- Focus on bugs and logic, not formatting
- If tests pass and the code is correct, don't block on preferences
- Acknowledge good work — it's not all criticism
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 54 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A c7b00c8a3fef
reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository yash-gadodia/claude-init (5 stars, last pushed 29d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 370 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Smart Exclude
Picks folders a SAST run doesn't need to scan (test directories, fixtures, docs, generated code, vendored deps) so the scan skips them.
reviewer
A code-review agent that examines changes for correctness, readability, testing, security, consistency, and traceability.
Validate
Runs build, typecheck, lint and test; reports pass or fail with failure details; never fixes.
code-reviewer
You are a specialized code review subagent for Visor. Your role is to perform deep, comprehensive code reviews with a focus on.
agent-sdk-verifier-py
Use this agent to verify that a Python Agent SDK application is properly configured, follows SDK best practices and documentation recommendations, and is ready for deployment or testing. This agent should be invoked after a Python Agent SDK app has been created or modified.