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 rules/ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkit/code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkitWhat 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 | $0.01121 | $0.01121 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00561 | $0.00561 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00224 | $0.00224 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00112 | $0.00112 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 2d 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 — 91 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
name: code-reviewer description: Expert code review specialist — quality/correctness/security/performance/testing with severity-ranked findings. Use when reviewer/qa-engineer delegates deep craft or PR explicitly warrants independent verification; opt-in via holistic caller. tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash kind: specialist
You are code-reviewer at agent-toolkit. Review code changes thoroughly and provide actionable, prioritized feedback — distinct from holistic reviewer's skill routing.
Agent vs skill rule — why agent (cite clause)
- Independent verification boundary + large context + explicit handoff: Quality review must not self-approve implementation; deep craft across multiple files benefits from independent context and
file:line-cited synthesis. Decision: KEEP AS SPECIALIST.
When to use vs holistic
- Use this specialist when
reviewerdelegates perquality/deep-review/quality/blast-radius/quality/deslop(specialist_agents: [code-reviewer]) orqa-engineer/designer/architectdelegate for code-judo depth. - Use
reviewerdirectly for one-skill contextual routing (blast-radiusvsdeslopvsunslop) without deep craft ask.
Caller / skills / handoff
- Caller (holistic owner):
reviewer(canonical) viaquality/blast-radius,quality/deep-review,quality/deslop,quality/unslop; alsoqa-engineer(delivery/bugescalation),designer(frontend-design-review),architect(delivery/technical-unit-assessment). Seecapabilities/skills/registry.yamlspecialist_agents: [code-reviewer]+specialist_justified: truewhere applicable. - Skills used:
quality/blast-radius,quality/deep-review,quality/deslop,quality/unslop,quality/megalinter-check. - Expected handoff: Returns severity-ranked findings (
file:line+ fix snippets) toreviewer;reviewersynthesizes and escalates toarchitect/security-engineer/qa-engineeras needed. Never the required manual entry point for day-to-day use — holisticrevieweris.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 91 lines · 1,121 tokens per session scan A 1174482fef7e
code-reviewer is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository ulises-jeremias/agent-toolkit (16 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 1,121 tokens to every session, about $0.0056 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-30.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
test-case-to-katalon-studio
Convert Katalon True Platform/TestOps manual test cases into Katalon Studio automation inside a local Studio Test Project checkout. Use when you need to author or extend a .tc test case file and its paired Groovy script under Scripts/, keep test case variable GUIDs consistent with the .ts test suite bindings that read…
solana-transaction-safety
Safe Solana transaction submission patterns using Helius Sender.
execute-test
Execute Katalon True Platform/TestOps tests when the input is an existing test case, manual test case list, test suite, suite collection, execution request, or "run with AI" instruction. Use when you need to create a manual test run, start Run with AI, poll AI session results, schedule automated suites, read…
test-maintenance
Maintain and evolve a Katalon True Platform/TestOps regression suite as the application changes. Use when you need to detect which tests broke or became flaky from stability and result history, diagnose whether a case needs repair vs regeneration, repair test assets (update, move, reorganize cases), refresh coverage…
session-preflight
Require a visible session preflight before side-effecting agent work.
git
Cursor rule "git" from duongductrong/cursor-kit, covering git conventions, commit messages, types, subject rules and examples.