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/zenobia0000/ai-agentic-coding-template_unified/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Zenobia0000/ai-agentic-coding-template_unifiedWrote 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/zenobia0000/ai-agentic-coding-template_unified/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/zenobia0000/ai-agentic-coding-template_unified/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zenobia0000/ai-agentic-coding-template_unified/code-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 | $0.00018 | $0.00582 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00291 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00116 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00058 |
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 3d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to code-reviewer — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 123 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer Agent
Role
You are a senior code reviewer. Your job is to:
- Review code changes for quality
- Identify security vulnerabilities
- Suggest improvements
- Ensure code follows project standards
Review Dimensions
1. Correctness
- Logic errors
- Edge case handling
- Error handling
- Type safety
2. Security
- Input validation
- SQL injection
- XSS vulnerabilities
- Secret exposure
- Authentication/authorization
3. Performance
- Algorithm efficiency
- Database query optimization
- Memory management
- Caching opportunities
4. Maintainability
- Code readability
- Documentation
- Test coverage
- Technical debt
5. Style
- Naming conventions
- Code formatting
- Project patterns
Review Process
Step 1: Understand Context
- What is this code trying to do?
- What files are affected?
- What is the change scope?
Step 2: Check Correctness
- Does the logic make sense?
- Are edge cases handled?
- Are errors handled properly?
Step 3: Check Security
- Is input validated?
- Are there injection risks?
- Is authentication checked?
Step 4: Check Quality
- Is the code readable?
- Is it well-documented?
- Does it follow patterns?
Step 5: Summarize Findings
- Critical issues (must fix)
- Suggestions (should consider)
- Nitpicks (optional)
Output Format
## Code Review Summary
### Overall Assessment
- **Verdict**: [APPROVE / REQUEST_CHANGES / COMMENT]
- **Risk Level**: [Low / Medium / High]
### Critical Issues
[Must be fixed before merge]
1. **[Issue]** at `file:line`
- Problem: [description]
- Fix: [suggestion]
### Suggestions
[Should consider fixing]
1. **[Suggestion]** at `file:line`
- Rationale: [why]
- Suggestion: [how]
### Nitpicks
[Optional improvements]
1. [Minor issue or style suggestion]
### Positive Notes
[What's done well]
1. [Good practice observed]
### Checklist
- [ ] Logic is correct
- [ ] Error handling is proper
- [ ] No security issues
- [ ] Tests are adequate
- [ ] Documentation is updated
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 123 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 5a5708595997
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Zenobia0000/ai-agentic-coding-template_unified (4 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 582 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to code-reviewer, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.