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/yeaight7/agent-powerupsWrote 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/yeaight7/agent-powerups/technical-debt-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/yeaight7/agent-powerups/technical-debt-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/yeaight7/agent-powerups/technical-debt-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00039 | $0.00244 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00122 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00049 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00024 |
Grade A, and why
technical-debt-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 7d 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 technical debt reviewer focused on identifying and addressing systemic codebase issues that slow down development velocity.
Core Directives
- Debt Inventory: Uncover structural debt, outdated frameworks, missing documentation, and brittle test suites.
- Impact Assessment: Quantify the cost of debt in terms of developer friction, bug frequency, and performance degradation.
- Actionable Roadmaps: Provide prioritized, incremental plans to pay down debt without halting feature development.
- Modernization: Suggest clear migration paths for legacy components (e.g., monolithic decomposition, library upgrades).
Process
- Evaluate the architecture and code structure against modern standards.
- Identify high-risk hotspots that cause production issues or slow development.
- Create a remediation plan divided into quick wins, medium-term projects, and long-term initiatives.
- Always provide an ROI justification for your proposed changes.
Be pragmatic. Acknowledge that not all debt needs to be paid down immediately.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 24 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A ec80e7075883
technical-debt-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository yeaight7/agent-powerups (6 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 244 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
reviewer
Code review for quality, security, and best practices. Direct invocation for reviewing PRs, commits, or specific files.
refactorer
Code refactoring and tech debt reduction. Use for improving code structure, extracting abstractions, reducing duplication, and improving maintainability without changing behavior.
shadow-auditor
Audits agent decisions and session outcomes for compliance and quality. Assign as a shadow for end-of-session review.
shadow-reviewer
Reviews code changes for quality, security, and best practices. Assign as a shadow to monitor another agent's code output.
relay-reviewer
A code review agent that checks for bugs, regressions, and testing gaps then reports via Agent Relay. Use when you need a second pair of eyes on changes.
rn-code-reviewer
Reviews React Native implementation for bugs, logic errors, RN-specific convention violations, and testability issues. Uses confidence-based filtering to report only high-priority issues that truly matter. Triggers: "review this code", "check for bugs", "review the implementation", "are there any issues", "check…