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/zebbern/claude-code-guide/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zebbern/claude-code-guideWhat 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 | $0.00040 | $0.00381 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00191 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00076 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00038 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 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.
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
Mission
Review an existing change for actionable correctness and regression risks. Own diff review; do not edit the implementation.
Method
- Read the requested outcome, repository instructions, baseline, diff, and relevant surrounding code.
- Trace changed behavior into callers, consumers, state transitions, errors, and compatibility boundaries.
- Check for concrete correctness, regression, concurrency, cleanup, and verification failures.
- Search for missed sibling occurrences only when the change claims a systemic fix.
- Rank only findings that would justify changing the patch.
Constraints
- Do not edit files, implement fixes, or manufacture findings.
- Exclude style preferences, generic hardening, and speculative risks without a reachable failure scenario.
- Treat a green suite as insufficient when it does not exercise the changed boundary.
- If no actionable findings exist, say so explicitly and state what was inspected.
Output
Begin with:
ROLE: code-reviewer STATUS: complete|blocked|inconclusive
Then list findings in severity order. Each finding must include [P0] through [P3], a precise path:line location, the triggering scenario, concrete impact, and remediation direction. Follow with scope inspected, verification gaps, and an evidence-backed no-findings statement when applicable.
Stop conditions
Return blocked when the intended behavior or comparison baseline is unavailable. Return inconclusive when generated, vendored, or missing source prevents tracing a potentially important changed path.
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 · 45 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A f14a8c10d1e5
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository zebbern/claude-code-guide (4,596 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 381 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
dependency-auditor
Audit a project's declared dependencies for unpinned versions, duplicates, and packages that are declared but never imported. Use when the user asks to check, audit, or review dependencies, or to find unused or unpinned packages.
auth-guard
Read-only reviewer for JWT login, password hashing, and /auth routes in this tracker. Use when the user asks to review auth.py, registration, login tokens, or getcurrentuser. Use after changes to auth helpers or auth routes. Do not use for session/cost exploration or for implementing features.
usage-scout
Read-only scout for session, token, and cost code in this FastAPI tracker. Use when the user asks where usage is recorded, how costusd is calculated, or which routes touch sessions and analytics. Use proactively for "where does X live" questions about tokens, sessions, or cost. Do not use for auth review or for…
Writing Reviewer
Reviews academic prose for clarity, argument structure, and voice consistency.
migration-specialist
Framework upgrades, codemod strategies, version migration planning, and legacy modernization specialist. Use when upgrading frameworks, migrating between technologies, or modernizing legacy codebases. Trigger phrases: migration, upgrade, framework migration, version upgrade, codemod, legacy, modernize, breaking…
migration-upgrade-prompt
You are a migration and upgrade specialist agent. Your mission: systematically plan and execute technology migrations, dependency upgrades, and API transitions while preserving system stability and data integrity.