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/acaprino/daodanWrote 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/acaprino/daodan/pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/acaprino/daodan/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/acaprino/daodan/pr-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/acaprino/daodan/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/acaprino/daodan/pr-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 | $0.00000 | $0.00802 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00321 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00160 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00080 |
Grade A, and why
pr-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 9d 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 — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
pr-review
Execution harness
Selected topology: native-team. Use native Agent Teams when they are enabled in this session; otherwise dispatch the same roles as isolated subagents. Both paths satisfy the same contract, and which one answered changes nothing a reader of the report can observe. Declared worker isolation: required.
Harness obligations, none of them optional:
- Every dispatched worker runs in its own context and reads only coordinator-declared inputs. Independent reviewers never read peer results before their own delivery; no worker runs in the coordinator's context.
- Follow the dispatch plan below in phase order. A phase starts only after every phase it needs has
closed, and a phase closes only when every worker it dispatched is recorded
deliveredorfailed. A missing result is a recorded failure, never a silently shorter report. - Dispatch only roles from this set, as the phase graph or loaded method requires:
code-auditor,platform-engineering:platform-reviewer,premise-auditor,project-protocol:isolated-worker,react-development:react-performance-optimizer,security-auditor,typescript-development:type-safety-auditor - Workers may write only intermediate reports explicitly assigned by the coordinator. The final report artifact has one exclusive owner in its declaring phase.
Dispatch plan:
run: runs in the orchestrating context; producesartifact:pr-review-report.
Role bindings:
platform-engineering:platform-reviewer: dispatch the installedplatform-engineering:platform-revieweragent by its qualified identity.project-protocol:isolated-worker: dispatch the installedproject-protocol:isolated-workeragent by its qualified identity.react-development:react-performance-optimizer: dispatch the installedreact-development:react-performance-optimizeragent by its qualified identity.code-auditor: dispatch the installedsenior-review:code-auditoragent by its qualified identity.premise-auditor: dispatch the installedsenior-review:premise-auditoragent by its qualified identity.security-auditor: dispatch the installedsenior-review:security-auditoragent by its qualified identity.typescript-development:type-safety-auditor: dispatch the installedtypescript-development:type-safety-auditoragent by its qualified identity.- Method-owned inline workers use only
project-protocol:isolated-worker. Give each the full task, owned scope, authorization and budget, plus its expected report path. This permission exposes no other registry role.
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.
- 9d ago Changed · -272 lines · -86 tokens per session 4c60ee1ae916
- 1mo ago First seen · 330 lines · 86 tokens per session scan A 2211fcbed055
pr-review is a command published in the GitHub repository acaprino/daodan (9 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 802 tokens. 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 2026-09-05.
Other commands, from other repositories
speckit.spex.submit
Push and create PR for team review, with optional watch mode for CI monitoring.
git
The pre-finish status: branch, hygiene findings, message checks, workflow lint, template state.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
release-tag
Create and push a version tag after a release PR has been merged.
factory
Linha de montagem multi-agente (Software Factory) — spec-writer → builder em worktree isolado → 4 revisores paralelos (Security, Code, UI, UX) → approver com gate de risco e dashboard visual.
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.