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 commands/spencermarx/open-code-review/reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/spencermarx/open-code-reviewWrote 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/spencermarx/open-code-review/reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/spencermarx/open-code-review/reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/spencermarx/open-code-review/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 5.1 | $0.00000 | $0.00274 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00137 |
| Sonnet 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 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 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.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 55 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A f81d581bc6ce
reviewer is a command published in the GitHub repository spencermarx/open-code-review (355 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. 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. It is 100% identical to reviewer, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
team-review
Launch a multi-reviewer parallel code review with specialized review dimensions.
assemble-team
Assemble a pre-built agent team for parallel work - review, feature, debug, cross-platform, full-stack, or research.
audit-project
Multi-agent code review with iterative improvement.
pr-review
Reviews pull request changes to provide feedback, check for issues, and suggest improvements before merging into the main codebase.
code-review
Perform a comprehensive code review of recent changes.
sdlc-review
Anytime — Industry-standard code review. Spawns 3 parallel reviewers (compliance, bugs, history). Posts inline comments via gh pr comment.