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/tufantunc/review-proWrote 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/plugins/tufantunc/review-pro/review-pro)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/plugins/tufantunc/review-pro/review-pro"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/plugins/tufantunc/review-pro/review-pro/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/plugins/tufantunc/review-pro/review-pro"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/plugins/tufantunc/review-pro/review-pro.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>Grade A, and why
review-pro 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 26d 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
{
"name": "review-pro",
"displayName": "Review-Pro",
"version": "1.5.1",
"description": "Tiered AI code-review: triage -> relevant specialist reviewers -> synthesis. Reviews AI-written code using AI agents.",
"author": { "name": "review-pro contributors" },
"homepage": "https://github.com/tufantunc/review-pro",
"repository": "https://github.com/tufantunc/review-pro",
"license": "MIT",
"category": "developer-tools",
"keywords": ["code-review", "security", "code-quality", "subagents", "ai-code"],
"tags": ["review", "quality", "shipping"],
"skills": "./core/skills/",
"agents": "./core/agents/"
}
What it installs
The manifest is a name and a version. 1 plugin travel with it, and installing the plugin installs all of them. Each is measured on its own page, and each can be installed alone.
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.
- 26d ago Changed 9779eef08fc1
- 1mo ago Changed 59889e40b6a4
- 1mo ago Changed 8406d8583265
- 1mo ago First seen · 16 lines scan A defac28431ba
review-pro is a plugin published in the GitHub repository tufantunc/review-pro (5 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. Its token cost is not measured: this kind of file is read by the harness, not the model. 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 2026-09-08.
Other plugins, from other repositories
logic-lens
Logic-first code review using semi-formal execution tracing. Surfaces behavioral bugs, type contract breaches, boundary blindspots, and interprocedural semantic mismatches — the logic errors that cause production incidents in syntax-clean code.
logic-lens
Logic-first code review using semi-formal execution tracing. Surfaces behavioral bugs, semantic errors, and runtime failures that linters miss.
harness-engineering-skills
Two Claude Code engineering skills bundled as one plugin: review-loop (cross-LLM iterative code review with Codex or Gemini as peer) and harness (cybernetics-based Planner→Generator→Evaluator→Retro orchestration for complex tasks).
audit-protocol
Audits a code change against a 54-phase failure taxonomy and reports what it did not check, not just what it found. Domain overlays run first and force critical-path treatment.
norma
Checks AI-written code against your rules as it is written, and keeps a record of what it found.
brooks-lint
AI code reviews grounded in twelve classic engineering books — decay risk diagnostics with book citations, severity labels, and six analysis modes (PR review, architecture audit, tech debt, test quality, health dashboard, full-sweep auto-fix).