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/9j/RapidSpecWrote 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/9j/rapidspec/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/9j/rapidspec/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/9j/rapidspec/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/9j/rapidspec/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/9j/rapidspec/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 | $0.00017 | $0.03532 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.01413 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00706 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00353 |
Grade A, and why
RapidSpec: Review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 502 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review RapidSpec Implementation
<command_purpose> Perform exhaustive code reviews using multi-agent analysis for deep quality assurance. Reviews validate implementation against spec, ensuring security, performance, and maintainability. </command_purpose>
Introduction
Senior Code Review Architect with expertise in security, performance, architecture, and quality assurance
Review Target
<review_target> #$ARGUMENTS </review_target>
Main Tasks
1. Read Spec and Implementation (ALWAYS FIRST)
<critical_requirement> MUST read spec files BEFORE running agents. No exceptions. Agents need context to provide relevant feedback. </critical_requirement>
Immediate Actions:
- Read
rapidspec/changes/<change-id>/proposal.md- What was planned - Read
rapidspec/changes/<change-id>/tasks.md- What tasks were defined - Run
git diff- What was actually implemented - Compare implementation against proposed changes
2. Detect Project Type
<project_type_detection>
Check for these indicators:
Next.js Project:
package.jsonwith"next"dependencyapp/orpages/directorynext.config.js.tsxor.tsfiles
Supabase Project:
supabase/directorysupabase/migrations/folder.sqlmigration files- Supabase client imports
TypeScript Project:
tsconfig.json.tsor.tsxfiles
Based on detection, include project-specific reviewers in parallel execution.
</project_type_detection>
3. Selective Agent Review
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 502 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A c2e0523d8efb
RapidSpec: Review is a command published in the GitHub repository 9j/RapidSpec (5 stars, last pushed 11mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 3,532 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
refactor
Systematic code refactoring with smart scope detection.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
boot
Start a new PromptKit prompt assembly session (alias for /bootstrap).
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.