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.
npx agentmods add commands/affaan-m/ecc/flutter-reviewgit 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/flutter-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/affaan-m/ecc/flutter-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/affaan-m/ecc/flutter-review.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 | $0.00032 | $0.00924 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00462 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00185 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00092 |
Grade A, and why
flutter-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 2d 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:
- flutter-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- flutter-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- flutter-review — 95% identical, 20 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 117 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Flutter Code Review
This command invokes the flutter-reviewer agent to review Flutter/Dart code changes.
What This Command Does
- Gather Context: Review
git diff --stagedandgit diff - Inspect Project: Check
pubspec.yaml,analysis_options.yaml, state management solution - Security Pre-scan: Check for hardcoded secrets and critical security issues
- Full Review: Apply the complete review checklist
- Report Findings: Output issues grouped by severity with fix guidance
Prerequisites
Before running /flutter-review, ensure:
- Build passes — run
/flutter-buildfirst; a review on broken code is incomplete - Tests pass — run
/flutter-testto confirm no regressions - No merge conflicts — resolve all conflicts so the diff reflects only intentional changes
flutter analyzeis clean — fix analyzer warnings before review
When to Use
Use /flutter-review when:
- Before submitting a PR with Flutter/Dart changes (after build and tests pass)
- After implementing a new feature to catch issues early
- When reviewing someone else's Flutter code
- To audit a widget, state management component, or service class
- Before a production release
Review Areas
| Area | Severity |
|---|---|
| Hardcoded secrets, cleartext HTTP | CRITICAL |
| Architecture violations, state management anti-patterns | CRITICAL |
| Widget rebuild issues, resource leaks | HIGH |
Missing dispose(), BuildContext after await |
HIGH |
| Dart null safety, missing error/loading states | HIGH |
| Const propagation, widget composition | HIGH |
Performance: expensive work in build() |
HIGH |
| Accessibility, semantic labels | MEDIUM |
| Missing tests for state transitions | HIGH |
| Hardcoded strings (l10n) | MEDIUM |
| Pub dependency hygiene | LOW |
Example Session
User: /flutter-review
Agent:
# Flutter Code Review
## Context
Changed files:
- lib/features/auth/presentation/login_page.dart
- lib/features/auth/data/auth_repository_impl.dart
State management: Riverpod (detected from pubspec.yaml)
Architecture: feature-first
## Security Pre-scan
✓ No hardcoded secrets detected
✓ No cleartext HTTP calls
## Review Findings
[HIGH] BuildContext used after async gap without mounted check
File: lib/features/auth/presentation/login_page.dart:67
Issue: `context.go('/home')` called after `await auth.login(...)` with no `mounted` check.
Fix: Add `if (!context.mounted) return;` before any navigation after awaits (Flutter 3.7+).
[HIGH] AsyncValue error state not handled
File: lib/features/auth/presentation/login_page.dart:42
Issue: `ref.watch(authProvider)` switches on loading/data but has no `error` branch.
Fix: Add error case to the switch expression or `when()` call to show a user-facing error message.
[MEDIUM] Hardcoded string not localized
File: lib/features/auth/presentation/login_page.dart:89
Issue: `Text('Login')` — user-visible string not using localization system.
Fix: Use the project's l10n accessor: `Text(context.l10n.loginButton)`.
## Review Summary
| Severity | Count | Status |
|----------|-------|--------|
| CRITICAL | 0 | pass |
| HIGH | 2 | block |
| MEDIUM | 1 | info |
| LOW | 0 | note |
Verdict: BLOCK — HIGH issues must be fixed before merge.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 117 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 631142330e58
flutter-review is a command published in the GitHub repository affaan-m/ECC (248,541 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 924 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 commands, from other repositories
init
Scaffold a new MindBase project (v2 layout). Usage: /mb:init [template] [-- mission ...].
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
constitution
Create or update the project constitution from interactive or provided principle inputs.