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/archcore-ai/pluginWrote 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/archcore-ai/plugin/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/archcore-ai/plugin/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/archcore-ai/plugin/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/archcore-ai/plugin/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/archcore-ai/plugin/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 | $0.00039 | $0.00106 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00042 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00021 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00011 |
Grade A, and why
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.
What it actually says
/archcore:review
Arguments
The user invoked this command with: $ARGUMENTS
Instructions
Use the Archcore skill at skills/review/SKILL.md.
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 Changed · +10 tokens per session 91a32245c628
- 1mo ago First seen · 15 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 501a21358849
review is a command published in the GitHub repository archcore-ai/plugin (58 stars, last pushed 27d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 106 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
pn-audit-data
Design or review database schema — normalization, indexing strategy, migration plan, and data model decisions. Surgical command for database design. Use standalone or as part of pn-backend-audit.
pn-audit-api
Surgical API design review — REST conventions, status codes, response shapes, validation, and schema leaks. Use standalone or as part of pn-backend-audit. Outputs a scored fix roadmap.
pn-audit-security
OWASP-guided security review — auth posture, input validation, secrets, CORS, JWT, rate limiting. Surgical command for backend security. Use standalone or as part of pn-backend-audit.
open-pr
Create a pull request for the current branch following the the team's standard PR template.
apollo-review
Review the completed migration for $ARGUMENTS against the original investigation and produce a detailed report.
code-review
Review code quality applying DRY, SOLID, naming, and formatting standards.