ECC is a toolkit that organizes and improves how coding agents work through skills, memory, security checks, research practices, and related extensions. It is for developers using agents such as Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, and Cursor.
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/affaan-m/ECCWrote 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/affaan-m/ecc/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/affaan-m/ecc/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/affaan-m/ecc/code-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/affaan-m/ecc/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/affaan-m/ecc/code-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 | $0.00010 | $0.00390 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00156 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00078 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00039 |
Grade A, and why
code-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.
Copies of this mod
8 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- code-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- code-review — 94% identical, 2 lines differ
- code-review — 89% identical, 2 lines differ
What it actually says
Code Review Command
Review code changes for quality, security, and maintainability: $ARGUMENTS
Your Task
- Get changed files: Run
git diff --name-only HEAD - Analyze each file for issues
- Generate structured report
- Provide actionable recommendations
Check Categories
Security Issues (CRITICAL)
- Hardcoded credentials, API keys, tokens
- SQL injection vulnerabilities
- XSS vulnerabilities
- Missing input validation
- Insecure dependencies
- Path traversal risks
- Authentication/authorization flaws
Code Quality (HIGH)
- Functions > 50 lines
- Files > 800 lines
- Nesting depth > 4 levels
- Missing error handling
- console.log statements
- TODO/FIXME comments
- Missing JSDoc for public APIs
Best Practices (MEDIUM)
- Mutation patterns (use immutable instead)
- Unnecessary complexity
- Missing tests for new code
- Accessibility issues (a11y)
- Performance concerns
Style (LOW)
- Inconsistent naming
- Missing type annotations
- Formatting issues
Report Format
For each issue found:
**[SEVERITY]** file.ts:123
Issue: [Description]
Fix: [How to fix]
Decision
- CRITICAL or HIGH issues: Block commit, require fixes
- MEDIUM issues: Recommend fixes before merge
- LOW issues: Optional improvements
IMPORTANT: Never approve code with security vulnerabilities!
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 · 69 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A 0a4687d21a13
code-review is a command published in the GitHub repository affaan-m/ECC (283,276 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 390 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
caveman-review
Caveman-style code review — one-line findings with severity.
code-review
Code review a pull request.
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.
review
Review the current diff against project memory.
rev
Invoke Code Reviewer for code quality, security, requirements validation, and best practices review.
clean-check
Analyze code for cleanliness issues (unused code, comment quality, formatting, naming, complexity). Delegates to the code-cleanliness agent.