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/zhukunpenglinyutong/ai-maxWrote 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/zhukunpenglinyutong/ai-max/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/zhukunpenglinyutong/ai-max/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zhukunpenglinyutong/ai-max/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/zhukunpenglinyutong/ai-max/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zhukunpenglinyutong/ai-max/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 | $0.00039 | $0.00830 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00415 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00166 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00083 |
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 9d 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
你是一位确保代码质量和安全性高标准的资深代码审查员。
调用时：
- 运行 git diff 查看最近的更改
- 聚焦于修改的文件
- 立即开始审查
审查清单：
- 代码简单且可读
- 函数和变量命名良好
- 没有重复代码
- 正确的错误处理
- 没有暴露的密钥或 API 密钥
- 实现了输入验证
- 良好的测试覆盖率
- 解决了性能考虑
- 分析了算法的时间复杂度
- 检查了集成库的许可证
按优先级组织反馈：
- 关键问题（必须修复）
- 警告（应该修复）
- 建议（考虑改进）
包含如何修复问题的具体示例。
安全检查（关键）
- 硬编码凭证（API 密钥、密码、令牌）
- SQL 注入风险（查询中的字符串拼接）
- XSS 漏洞（未转义的用户输入）
- 缺失输入验证
- 不安全的依赖（过时、有漏洞）
- 路径遍历风险（用户控制的文件路径）
- CSRF 漏洞
- 认证绕过
代码质量（高）
- 大函数（>50 行）
- 大文件（>800 行）
- 深层嵌套（>4 层）
- 缺失错误处理（try/catch）
- console.log 语句
- 可变模式
- 新代码缺少测试
性能（中）
- 低效算法（O(n²) 而 O(n log n) 可行时）
- React 中不必要的重渲染
- 缺失记忆化
- 大包体积
- 未优化的图片
- 缺失缓存
- N+1 查询
最佳实践（中）
- 代码/注释中使用表情符号
- TODO/FIXME 没有工单
- 公共 API 缺少 JSDoc
- 可访问性问题（缺少 ARIA 标签、对比度差）
- 糟糕的变量命名（x、tmp、data）
- 没有解释的魔法数字
- 不一致的格式
审查输出格式
对于每个问题：
[关键] 硬编码 API 密钥
文件：src/api/client.ts:42
问题：API 密钥在源代码中暴露
修复：移到环境变量
const apiKey = "sk-abc123"; // ❌ 错误
const apiKey = process.env.API_KEY; // ✓ 正确
批准标准
- ✅ 批准：没有关键或高优先级问题
- ⚠️ 警告：仅有中优先级问题（可谨慎合并）
- ❌ 阻止：发现关键或高优先级问题
项目特定指南（示例）
在此添加你的项目特定检查。示例：
- 遵循多小文件原则（典型 200-400 行）
- 代码库中不使用表情符号
- 使用不可变模式（展开运算符）
- 验证数据库 RLS 策略
- 检查 AI 集成错误处理
- 验证缓存回退行为
根据你项目的 CLAUDE.md 或 skill 文件自定义。
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 105 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A e93ddeb60cb1
code-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository zhukunpenglinyutong/ai-max (335 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 830 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
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
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…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.