I go back and forth on this one, is a four, or a three? I decided on three when Josh took a turn for stupidity right at the end of the book and bailed when Eli got hurt. What a fucking jerky thing to do. Also, to be honest, Josh never seemed like a real addict to me. Oh, he said all the words etc but, well, I know addicts and he didn't come off right somehow, like maybe the author had only read about addiction and never seen it in person (or at least read stuff written by addicts about their addictions) In general it was pretty good right until Josh got stupid near the end.
One thing that really bugged me though was the fact that Josh had killed people while working as an undercover guy. Undercover agents are allowed to do property crimes and other stuff like sell drugs, or even take them, but they are not allowed to commit crimes against other people. Yet it's treated like "welp, these were criminals who killed people so I was just executing them." It doesn't matter if they were criminals who killed other people, they still did not deserve to be murdered, especially by a law-enforcement agent. This wasn't the case of self-defense either, it sounded very much like executions. The whole point of law and law-enforcement is so that people can be tried in a court of law that determines their guilt or innocence, and what their punishment is if they are guilty. It isn't the FBI agent's job to determine any of that, that's for a judge and jury. That is why we have trials. If agents and police officers are just going to go around killing people they believe are guilty what is the point of having a justice system??? It's wrong to kill people even to maintain cover, in fact it's illegal to do so!