local-review

local-review is a command for Claude Code from agent37-platform/agent37-skills-collection. It costs 7 tokens per session (1,721 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A command for reviewing uncommitted local code changes, including both staged and unstaged Git changes.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review the current working directory, optionally focusing on a particular file, method, change, or concern.
Why use it?
It helps find bugs, security issues, and code-quality problems before the changes are committed.

Command for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: allowed-tools in frontmatter. Also seen: mentions CLAUDE.md.

Part of the local-review plugin — 1 command shipped together

Good fit Use it to review the current working directory, optionally focusing on a particular file, method, change, or concern.

Compare 6 commands from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/agent37-platform/agent37-skills-collection/local-review
Install

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.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/agent37-platform/agent37-skills-collection

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install local-review, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 1 command.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for local-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/agent37-platform/agent37-skills-collection/local-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/commands/agent37-platform/agent37-skills-collection/local-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/agent37-platform/agent37-skills-collection/local-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/agent37-platform/agent37-skills-collection/local-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.

agentmods 80×15 button for local-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/agent37-platform/agent37-skills-collection/local-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/agent37-platform/agent37-skills-collection/local-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 7 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,721 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00007 $0.01721
Opus 5 $0.00003 $0.00860
Sonnet 5 $0.00001 $0.00344
Haiku 4.5 $0.00001 $0.00172

Measured 11d ago against content hash 878388df9e47, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-10, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

local-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 11d 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.

plugins/local-review/commands/local-review.md · 146 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 146 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Provide a code review for uncommitted local changes (both staged and unstaged).

Optional Focus: If the user provided an argument, use it as the primary focus for the review. The argument might be:

  • A specific area to focus on (e.g., "focus on the payment flow")
  • Context about what changed (e.g., "I refactored the auth module")
  • Specific concerns to check (e.g., "make sure the error handling is correct")
  • A method or file to prioritize (e.g., "check the handleSubmit function")

When a focus is provided, all review agents should:

  1. Prioritize issues related to the focus area
  2. Provide more detailed analysis of the focused area
  3. Still check for critical issues elsewhere, but weight the focus area higher

To do this, follow these steps precisely:

  1. Use a Haiku agent to check the current state of the working directory:

    • Run git status to see what files have changes
    • Run git diff for unstaged changes and git diff --staged for staged changes
    • If there are no changes, do not proceed and inform the user
    • Return a summary of what files changed and the nature of the changes
    • If a focus argument was provided, note which files/changes are most relevant to that focus
  2. Use another Haiku agent to find any relevant CLAUDE.md files: the root CLAUDE.md file (if one exists), as well as any CLAUDE.md files in the directories containing modified files

  3. Then, launch 5 parallel Sonnet agents to independently code review the changes. Each agent should read the full file context when needed. If a focus argument was provided, include it in each agent's prompt so they prioritize that area. The agents should return a list of issues and the reason each issue was flagged: a. Agent #1: Audit the changes to make sure they comply with any CLAUDE.md guidelines found. Note that CLAUDE.md is guidance for Claude as it writes code, so not all instructions will be applicable during code review. b. Agent #2: Read the file changes, then scan for bugs, logic errors, and edge cases. Focus on significant bugs, avoid nitpicks. Check for: null/undefined issues, off-by-one errors, race conditions, resource leaks, error handling gaps. c. Agent #3: Scan for security vulnerabilities (OWASP top 10): injection flaws, XSS, auth bypass, sensitive data exposure, insecure dependencies, etc. d. Agent #4: Check for TypeScript type safety issues, performance problems, and code quality concerns that would fail code review. e. Agent #5 (Code Simplifier): You are an expert code simplification specialist focused on enhancing code clarity, consistency, and maintainability while preserving exact functionality. Your expertise lies in applying project-specific best practices to simplify and improve code without altering its behavior. You prioritize readable, explicit code over overly compact solutions.

    Analyze the changed code and flag issues related to:

    1. Preserve Functionality: Flag any simplification that would change what the code does - only how it does it matters. All original features, outputs, and behaviors must remain intact.

    2. Apply Project Standards: Flag violations of coding standards from CLAUDE.md including:

      • Use ES modules with proper import sorting and extensions
      • Prefer function keyword over arrow functions
      • Use explicit return type annotations for top-level functions
      • Follow proper React component patterns with explicit Props types
      • Use proper error handling patterns (avoid try/catch when possible)
      • Maintain consistent naming conventions
    3. Enhance Clarity: Flag code that could be simplified by:

      • Reducing unnecessary complexity and nesting
      • Eliminating redundant code and abstractions
      • Improving readability through clear variable and function names
      • Consolidating related logic
      • Removing unnecessary comments that describe obvious code
      • IMPORTANT: Flag nested ternary operators - prefer switch statements or if/else chains for multiple conditions
      • Choose clarity over brevity - explicit code is often better than overly compact code

Read the full file on GitHub · 146 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 11d ago First seen · 146 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A 878388df9e47

Subscribe to this mod's changes

local-review is a command published in the GitHub repository agent37-platform/agent37-skills-collection (186 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 1,721 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-30.