Agent Orchestrator is a local desktop workspace for running and supervising multiple coding agents, giving each task its own session, workspace, branch, and feedback loop. It is for developers coordinating agent fleets across repositories, pull requests, CI runs, reviews, and merges. The catalogue entries are commands, skills, and instructions for working with this orchestrator.
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/Untrivial-ai/agent-orchestratorWrote 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/untrivial-ai/agent-orchestrator/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/untrivial-ai/agent-orchestrator/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/untrivial-ai/agent-orchestrator/review/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/untrivial-ai/agent-orchestrator/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/untrivial-ai/agent-orchestrator/review.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 | $0.00707 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00283 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00141 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00071 |
Grade A, and why
review 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 23d 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
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- review — 91% identical, 93 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 123 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
ao review
Manage AO code reviews of a worker's PR.
Syntax
ao review <subcommand> [args] [flags]
The review loop can be inspected, submitted, cancelled, or triggered again.
Subcommands
ao review ls
List review runs for a worker session. Alias: list.
Syntax:
ao review ls <worker-session-id> [flags]
Flags:
| Flag | Meaning | Default / Required |
|---|---|---|
--json |
Output reviews as JSON | - |
Example:
ao review ls mer-3
ao review submit
Record a reviewer's result for a worker's PR.
Syntax:
ao review submit [worker-session-id] [flags]
Flags:
| Flag | Meaning | Default / Required |
|---|---|---|
--body string |
Review body: a path to a Markdown file, or - to read from stdin |
- |
--review-id string |
Id of the GitHub PR review just posted (the .id from the gh api POST that created the review) |
- |
--reviews string |
JSON review results array or object: a path, or - to read from stdin |
- |
--run string |
Review run id | Required |
--session string |
Worker session id (or pass it as the positional argument) | - |
--verdict string |
Review verdict: approved or changes_requested |
Required |
If the local daemon is restarting when a result is submitted, AO retains the parsed result in memory and retries the same idempotent request for up to 30 seconds. Validation errors return immediately. If the daemon remains unavailable, the command reports failure and can be repeated safely; daemon idempotency handles the case where an earlier connection dropped after committing the result.
Examples:
# Submit an approved review for session mer-3
ao review submit mer-3 --run review-run-1 --verdict approved
# Submit a changes-requested review with a body from stdin
echo "Please fix the null check on line 42." | ao review submit --session mer-3 --run review-run-1 --verdict changes_requested --body -
ao review cancel
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.
- 23d ago Changed · +71 lines 6118276ee2d5
- 1mo ago Changed · +6 lines def56ccb5959
- 1mo ago First seen · 46 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 34308cf0b8af
review is a command published in the GitHub repository Untrivial-ai/agent-orchestrator (13,596 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 707 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
validate
Effectue une revue critique des modifications de code, sans modifier le code source. Verifie la coherence avec la demande et l'analyse, les bonnes pratiques et les regressions. Produit un rapport de validation (Valide/Non valide) dans l'analyse.
critique
Design lens critique covering visual hierarchy, clarity, and anti-slop patterns — produces a findings table, no code edits unless asked. Use when the user wants a design review, says "what's wrong with this UI", or needs a second opinion before a handoff or presentation.
devkit.github.review-pr
Provides comprehensive GitHub pull request review with code quality, security, and best practices analysis. Use when reviewing a PR before merging.
sync-to-copilot
Sync skills and instructions from Claude or Codex to GitHub Copilot CLI.
fix-comments
Address PR review comments by implementing requested changes automatically.
review
Perform a thorough code review of the current uncommitted changes or a specified file/directory.