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/bravew/trove/reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bravew/troveWrote 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/bravew/trove/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/bravew/trove/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/bravew/trove/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 | $0.00009 | $0.00971 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00485 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00194 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00097 |
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 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 — 139 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
Review scope: $ARGUMENTS
If a PRP file was used for implementation, read it first to understand the requirements.
Process
-
Identify changes to review:
- No args: review staged changes via
git diff --staged - File paths: read the specified files
- PR number:
gh pr view <number> --json files,additions,deletions - Branch: detect base branch, then
git diff origin/$BASE...HEAD
- No args: review staged changes via
-
Detect project stack from config files (pyproject.toml, package.json, Package.swift, next.config.*, etc.) to apply stack-specific review criteria.
-
Read the FULL context — read complete files to understand structure and data flow before flagging issues. Verify issues are ACTUAL bugs, not false positives.
-
Apply project rules — if
.claude/rules/exists, read and apply all rules found there. -
Run quality checks using project-appropriate tooling:
Stack Commands Python ruff check .,ruff format --check .Node/React/Vue pnpm lintornpm run lint,pnpm type-checkNext.js npm run lint,npm run type-checkSwift swiftlint,swift build
Universal Review Focus
1. Code Quality
- Naming: clear, consistent, follows project conventions
- Structure: well-organized, single responsibility
- Error handling: comprehensive, no silent failures
- Type safety: proper types, no unsafe casts or
any
2. Security
- No exposed secrets, API keys, tokens, or credentials in code or logs
- Input validation on all user-facing boundaries
- Authentication/authorization correctly enforced
- Injection prevention (SQL, XSS, command injection)
3. Performance
- No unnecessary allocations or re-renders
- No N+1 queries or unbounded loops
- Proper caching and memoization where appropriate
4. Stack-Specific Patterns
Python/FastAPI:
- Top-level imports only (no inline imports)
- Async patterns: proper
await, no blocking calls in async - SQLAlchemy: eager loading, proper transactions
- Logging:
logger.exception()in handlers,extra={}for WARNING/ERROR
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 · 139 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A c595846de3a0
review is a command published in the GitHub repository bravew/trove (10 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 971 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 2026-08-31.
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.