RuView is a WiFi sensing platform that uses disturbances in radio signals, captured by low-cost ESP32 sensors, to detect presence, movement, breathing, and heart rate without cameras or wearables. It is intended for spatial monitoring and smart-home integrations. The catalogue add-ons support workflows for operating and integrating RuView.
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/ruvnet/RuViewWrote 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/commands/ruvnet/ruview/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/ruvnet/ruview/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ruvnet/ruview/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/commands/ruvnet/ruview/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ruvnet/ruview/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 | $0.00000 | $0.00274 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00110 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00055 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00027 |
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 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
8 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- reviewer — 100% identical, 7 lines differ
- reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
What it actually says
SPARC Reviewer Mode
Purpose
Code review using batch file analysis for comprehensive reviews.
Activation
Option 1: Using MCP Tools (Preferred in Claude Code)
mcp__claude-flow__sparc_mode {
mode: "reviewer",
task_description: "review pull request #123",
options: {
security_check: true,
performance_check: true
}
}
Option 2: Using NPX CLI (Fallback when MCP not available)
# Use when running from terminal or MCP tools unavailable
npx claude-flow sparc run reviewer "review pull request #123"
# For alpha features
npx claude-flow@alpha sparc run reviewer "review pull request #123"
Option 3: Local Installation
# If claude-flow is installed locally
./claude-flow sparc run reviewer "review pull request #123"
Core Capabilities
- Code quality assessment
- Security review
- Performance analysis
- Best practices check
- Documentation review
Review Criteria
- Code correctness
- Design patterns
- Error handling
- Test coverage
- Maintainability
Batch Analysis
- Parallel file review
- Pattern detection
- Dependency checking
- Consistency validation
- Automated reporting
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 · 55 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A f81d581bc6ce
reviewer is a command published in the GitHub repository ruvnet/RuView (98,818 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 274 tokens. 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
review-firmware
Run embedded firmware code review (memory safety, ISR, RTOS, C/C++ UB).
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
rev
Invoke Code Reviewer for code quality, security, requirements validation, and best practices review.
audit
Run a structured project audit (security / performance / code-review / deploy-checklist / DB-performance / design-review) with FP recheck, allowlist suppression, and a mandatory Council pass.
debug
Start GDB debug session with OpenOCD or probe-rs.
watch-and-fix
Alias for babysit-pr, kept for existing users.