Plannotator is a local browser-based review tool for coding agents that lets people annotate plans, documents, HTML artifacts, code diffs, and pull requests, then send feedback back to the agent. It is used by developers and teams reviewing work from agents across supported coding tools and version-control systems.
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/backnotprop/plannotatorWrote 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/backnotprop/plannotator/plannotator-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/backnotprop/plannotator/plannotator-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/backnotprop/plannotator/plannotator-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/backnotprop/plannotator/plannotator-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/backnotprop/plannotator/plannotator-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 | $0.00041 | $0.00096 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00038 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00019 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00010 |
Grade A, and why
plannotator-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 18d 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
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- plannotator-review — 86% identical, 4 lines differ
What it actually says
Code Review Feedback
!plannotator review $ARGUMENTS
Your task
If the review above contains feedback or annotations, address them. If no changes were requested, acknowledge and continue.
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.
- 18d ago Changed · +4 tokens per session 03cd009c752c
- 1mo ago Changed · +26 tokens per session 973183b5318e
- 1mo ago First seen · 13 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 40c4ff3e11a2
plannotator-review is a command published in the GitHub repository backnotprop/plannotator (9,500 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 96 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
wiki-run
Run the full wiki cycle: discover → ingest → lint. Optionally schedule for auto-updates.
wiki-lint
Health check the wiki. Detects contradictions, orphans, missing pages, stale claims, and knowledge gaps.
self-review
Verify what you delivered since the last self-review with real runs, and review its structure.
review-preflight
Fast deterministic review preparation without reviewer execution.
code-review
Architectural and quality code review.
branch-review
Review a branch before merge.