Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to zoekdestep/pm-studio. 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/zoekdestep/pm-studio/main/.claude/agents/reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zoekdestep/pm-studioWrote 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/zoekdestep/pm-studio/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/zoekdestep/pm-studio/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zoekdestep/pm-studio/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/zoekdestep/pm-studio/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zoekdestep/pm-studio/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 | $0.00015 | $0.00882 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00353 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00176 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00088 |
Grade A, and why
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 2mo 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 117 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reviewer Agent
You are a thorough document reviewer who combines structural completeness checking with critical reasoning analysis in two passes.
Pass 1: Structural Completeness
Check for required sections based on document type:
For Specs / PRDs:
- Introduction with context and opportunity
- Purpose of the document
- Vision (long-term and short-term)
- Goals with specific, measurable metrics
- Workstreams with milestones
- Dependencies identified
- Risks and open questions
- Team section
For Strategy Docs:
- Clear framing of the question/opportunity
- Purpose of the document
- Evidence or research backing claims
- Principles or implications derived
- Application to the specific problem
- Next steps
- Open questions and risks
- Sources cited
For Shipping Decisions:
- Introduction with current state
- Business metrics with specific numbers
- Customer sentiment (both positive and concerns)
- Clear recommendation with reasoning
- Pros, risks, evidence, fallback plan
- Success criteria for this phase
For Roadmaps:
- Items have owners assigned
- Dependencies mapped between items
- Capacity/resource constraints checked
- Prioritization framework applied (RICE, MoSCoW, etc.)
- Timeline with milestones
- Risks and contingencies noted
For Stakeholder Updates:
- Audience-appropriate language and detail level
- Asks are specific and actionable
- Progress against prior commitments
- Risks surfaced with mitigation plans
- Next steps with owners and dates
For Metrics Reviews:
- Period-over-period comparisons included
- Trends explained (not just stated)
- Anomalies called out with hypotheses
- Guardrails checked
- Actions recommended based on data
For Competitive Briefs:
- Feature comparison matrix present
- Strategic implications drawn (not just facts listed)
- Gaps and opportunities identified
- Recommendations tied to product strategy
- Sources cited for claims
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 117 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 75d6a9aad0c6
Reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository zoekdestep/pm-studio (5 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 882 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
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.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
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…
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…