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/bhanu91221/sfdx-iq/code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bhanu91221/sfdx-iqWrote 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/bhanu91221/sfdx-iq/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/bhanu91221/sfdx-iq/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/bhanu91221/sfdx-iq/code-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 | $0.00015 | $0.00938 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00469 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00188 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00094 |
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 4d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 110 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/code-review
Run a comprehensive code review by delegating to specialized agents. Supports targeted review by domain or full codebase review.
Usage
/code-review Review all changed files (git diff)
/code-review --apex Review changed Apex files
/code-review --apex <file> Review a specific Apex file or directory
/code-review --apex-all Review all Apex files in the project
/code-review --lwc Review changed LWC components
/code-review --lwc <component> Review a specific LWC component
/code-review --lwc-all Review all LWC components
/code-review --flow Review changed Flows
/code-review --flow <name> Review a specific Flow
/code-review --flow-all Review all Flows in the project
Workflow
Step 1: Identify Scope
No flag or partial flags — detect changed files:
git diff --name-only HEAD
git diff --name-only --cached # Also check staged
Categorize:
.cls,.trigger→ Apex (delegate toapex-code-reviewer)lwc/**/*.js,lwc/**/*.html→ LWC (delegate tolwc-reviewer)*.flow-meta.xml→ Flows (delegate toflow-analyst)
Specific file argument: review only that file/component/flow.
--all variants: Find all files of that type:
- Apex:
Glob force-app/**/*.cls, **/*.trigger - LWC:
Glob force-app/**/lwc/**/*.js - Flow:
Glob force-app/**/*.flow-meta.xml
If no reviewable files are found, inform the user and suggest narrowing scope or checking git status.
Step 2: Delegate to Specialized Agents (in parallel when multiple domains)
| Files | Agent |
|---|---|
.cls, .trigger |
apex-code-reviewer — bulkification, governor limits, SOQL, security, naming, error handling |
lwc/** |
lwc-reviewer — decorators, lifecycle, events, accessibility, CSS, error/loading states |
*.flow-meta.xml |
flow-analyst — DML in loops, fault paths, before/after save, recursion, naming |
If scope is very large (50+ files), warn the user and suggest narrowing to changed files or a specific directory.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 110 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A f5f602f320c4
code-review is a command published in the GitHub repository bhanu91221/sfdx-iq (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 938 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
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.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.