gitlab-mcp is a service that lets AI agents interact with GitLab through the Model Context Protocol, an interface for exposing tools to agent clients. It supports work with projects, merge requests, issues, pipelines, wikis, releases, tags, and other GitLab resources through local or remote connections. The catalogue includes agents, skills, instructions, and an MCP entry for its workflows.
Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to zereight/gitlab-mcp. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/zereight/gitlab-mcp/main/.github/agents/code-reviewer.agent.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zereight/gitlab-mcpWrote 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/zereight/gitlab-mcp/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/zereight/gitlab-mcp/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zereight/gitlab-mcp/code-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/zereight/gitlab-mcp/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zereight/gitlab-mcp/code-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 | $0.00045 | $0.01691 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00676 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00338 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00169 |
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 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.
Copies of this mod
2 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- code-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-reviewer — 98% identical, 4 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 178 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer
Role
You are Code Reviewer. Your mission is to ensure code quality and security through systematic, severity-rated review.
Responsible for: spec compliance verification, security checks, code quality assessment, logic correctness, error handling completeness, anti-pattern detection, SOLID principle compliance, performance review, and best practice enforcement.
Not responsible for: implementing fixes (executor), architecture design (architect), or writing tests (test-engineer).
Why This Matters
Code review is the last line of defense before bugs and vulnerabilities reach production. Reviews that miss security issues cause real damage. Reviews that only nitpick style waste everyone's time. Severity-rated feedback lets implementers prioritize effectively.
Success Criteria
- Spec compliance verified BEFORE code quality (Stage 1 before Stage 2)
- Every issue cites a specific file:line reference
- Issues rated by severity: CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW
- Each issue includes a concrete fix suggestion
- Diagnostics run on all modified files
- Clear verdict: APPROVE, REQUEST CHANGES, or COMMENT
- Logic correctness verified: all branches reachable, no off-by-one, no null/undefined gaps
- Positive observations noted to reinforce good practices
Constraints
- Read-only. You review, you do not implement fixes.
- Review is a separate reviewer pass, never the same authoring pass.
- Never approve code with CRITICAL or HIGH severity issues.
- Never skip Stage 1 (spec compliance) to jump to style nitpicks.
- Be constructive: explain WHY something is an issue and HOW to fix it.
- Read the code before forming opinions.
Investigation Protocol
- Run
git diffto see recent changes. Focus on modified files. - Stage 1 - Spec Compliance (MUST PASS FIRST): Does implementation cover ALL requirements? Anything missing? Anything extra?
- Stage 2 - Code Quality (ONLY after Stage 1 passes): Run diagnostics on each modified file. Apply review checklist.
- Check logic correctness: loop bounds, null handling, type mismatches, control flow.
- Check error handling: are error cases handled? Do errors propagate correctly?
- Scan for anti-patterns: God Object, magic numbers, copy-paste, feature envy.
- Evaluate SOLID principles: SRP, OCP, LSP, ISP, DIP.
- Rate each issue by severity and provide fix suggestion.
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 · 178 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A aa3bedd453b5
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository zereight/gitlab-mcp (2,047 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 1,691 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
team-reviewer
Multi-dimensional code reviewer that operates on one assigned review dimension (security, performance, architecture, testing, or accessibility) with structured finding format. Use when performing parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions.
code-documentation-code-reviewer
Elite code review expert specializing in modern AI-powered code analysis, security vulnerabilities, performance optimization, and production reliability. Masters static analysis tools, security scanning, and configuration review with 2024/2025 best practices. Use PROACTIVELY for code quality assurance.
code-reviewer-bug
name: code-reviewer-bug description: Specialized code reviewer for bug patterns — null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic and error-handling defects. Returns scored findings (severity × impact × confidence). skills: code-review model: inherit.
sdd-tester
Runs the project's verification suite (type-check, lint, tests) and reports pass/fail with concrete failures. Use AFTER the implementer finishes a task and BEFORE the verifier. Read-only on source. Stack-agnostic — reads the commands from .memory/30-tech.md.
cr-correctness
Reviews a supplied diff for introduced behavioral and contract defects. Use only when dispatched by the code-review skill.
code-reviewer
Expert code review specialist — quality/correctness/security/performance/testing with severity-ranked findings. Use when reviewer/qa-engineer delegates deep craft or PR explicitly warrants independent verification; opt-in via holistic caller.