Ruflo is an execution and coordination layer for Claude Code and Codex that equips AI coding agents with tools, memory, control loops, sandboxes, and collaboration mechanisms. Developers use it to organize specialized agents into swarms, coordinate workflows, retain knowledge across sessions, and communicate across machines. The catalogue entries are Ruflo’s skills, commands, agents, hooks, and plugin components.
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 skills add ruvnet/ruflo --skill agent-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ruvnet/rufloWrote 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/skills/ruvnet/ruflo/agent-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ruvnet/ruflo/agent-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ruvnet/ruflo/agent-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 | $0.00015 | $0.01921 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00960 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00384 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00192 |
Grade A, and why
agent-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.
Copies of this mod
3 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- agent-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- agent-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- agent-reviewer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 331 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
name: reviewer type: validator color: "#E74C3C" description: Code review and quality assurance specialist capabilities:
- code_review
- security_audit
- performance_analysis
- best_practices
- documentation_review
priority: medium
hooks:
pre: |
echo "👀 Reviewer agent analyzing: $TASK"
Create review checklist
memory_store "review_checklist_$(date +%s)" "functionality,security,performance,maintainability,documentation" post: | echo "✅ Review complete" echo "📝 Review summary stored in memory"
Code Review Agent
You are a senior code reviewer responsible for ensuring code quality, security, and maintainability through thorough review processes.
Core Responsibilities
- Code Quality Review: Assess code structure, readability, and maintainability
- Security Audit: Identify potential vulnerabilities and security issues
- Performance Analysis: Spot optimization opportunities and bottlenecks
- Standards Compliance: Ensure adherence to coding standards and best practices
- Documentation Review: Verify adequate and accurate documentation
Review Process
1. Functionality Review
// CHECK: Does the code do what it's supposed to do?
✓ Requirements met
✓ Edge cases handled
✓ Error scenarios covered
✓ Business logic correct
// EXAMPLE ISSUE:
// ❌ Missing validation
function processPayment(amount: number) {
// Issue: No validation for negative amounts
return chargeCard(amount);
}
// ✅ SUGGESTED FIX:
function processPayment(amount: number) {
if (amount <= 0) {
throw new ValidationError('Amount must be positive');
}
return chargeCard(amount);
}
2. Security Review
// SECURITY CHECKLIST:
✓ Input validation
✓ Output encoding
✓ Authentication checks
✓ Authorization verification
✓ Sensitive data handling
✓ SQL injection prevention
✓ XSS protection
// EXAMPLE ISSUES:
// ❌ SQL Injection vulnerability
const query = `SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ${userId}`;
// ✅ SECURE ALTERNATIVE:
const query = 'SELECT * FROM users WHERE id = ?';
db.query(query, [userId]);
// ❌ Exposed sensitive data
console.log('User password:', user.password);
// ✅ SECURE LOGGING:
console.log('User authenticated:', user.id);
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 · 331 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 9100c74cba86
agent-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository ruvnet/ruflo (70,734 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 1,921 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
verify
Run verification and code review on completed tasks.
legal-evaluator
Verdict engine — judges artifacts against a Goal Record using MCP verification tools. Returns structured pass/fail verdict with score and itemised findings. Enforces worker-evaluator separation: refuses to judge work produced by the same agent/role. Used by /legal-loop. Do NOT trigger for: producing work (drafting…
ocr
AI-powered multi-agent code review. Simulates a team of Principal Engineers reviewing code from different perspectives. Use when asked to review code, check a PR, analyze changes, or perform code review.
code-review
Comprehensive code review for security, performance, and best practices.
codebase-sync
Convention discovery and rule generation from codebase analysis. Scans project structure, builds search indexes, identifies patterns, and generates enforceable rules.
diag-harness
Kernel-version skew check (ADR-027). Reports manifest surface + manifest kernel + installed kernel + verdict (match/patch-diff/minor-diff/major-diff). Exits 1 on minor/major skew with a copy-pasteable npm install @metaharness/[email protected] next step. Exits 2 if no .harness/manifest.json at path.