review

review is a command for coding agents from brennercruvinel/CCPlugins. It costs 0 tokens per session (383 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A code-review command that examines code for possible security, logic, performance, quality, and design problems. Code review is the process of checking software before it is accepted or shipped.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review a codebase, locate issues with file references, explain their impact, suggest fixes, and optionally turn findings into GitHub issues.
Why use it?
It provides a structured way to spot risks and maintenance problems that may be missed during ordinary development. It also helps organise multiple findings by severity and effort.

Command

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/brennercruvinel/ccplugins/review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brennercruvinel/CCPlugins

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 review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/brennercruvinel/ccplugins/review.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/commands/brennercruvinel/ccplugins/review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/brennercruvinel/ccplugins/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/brennercruvinel/ccplugins/review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 0 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 383 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
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 $0.00000 $0.00383
Opus 5 $0.00000 $0.00192
Sonnet 5 $0.00000 $0.00077
Haiku 4.5 $0.00000 $0.00038

Measured 4d ago against content hash 76b92bd7c18c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

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.

commands/review.md · 44 lines

What it actually says

Code Review

I'll review your code for potential issues.

Let me create a checkpoint before detailed analysis:

git add -A  
git commit -m "Pre-review checkpoint" || echo "No changes to commit"

I'll use specialized sub-agents for comprehensive analysis:

  • Security sub-agent: Credential exposure, input validation, vulnerabilities
  • Performance sub-agent: Bottlenecks, memory issues, optimization opportunities
  • Quality sub-agent: Code complexity, maintainability, best practices
  • Architecture sub-agent: Layer separation, dependency direction, scalability patterns

I'll examine files using the Read and Grep tools to analyze:

  1. Security Issues - credential exposure, input validation
  2. Logic Problems - error handling, edge cases
  3. Performance Concerns - inefficient patterns, bottlenecks
  4. Code Quality - complexity, maintainability

When I find multiple issues, I'll create a todo list to address them systematically.

For each issue, I'll:

  • Show exact location with file references
  • Explain the problem and potential impact
  • Provide specific remediation steps
  • Prioritize by severity and effort

After review, I'll ask: "Create GitHub issues for critical findings?"

  • Yes: I'll create prioritized issues with detailed descriptions
  • Todos only: I'll maintain local tracking for resolution
  • Summary: I'll provide actionable report

Important: I will NEVER:

  • Add "Co-authored-by" or any Claude signatures to commits
  • Add "Created by Claude" or any AI attribution to issues
  • Include "Generated with Claude Code" in any output
  • Modify git config or repository settings
  • Add any AI/assistant signatures or watermarks
  • Use emojis in commits, PRs, issues, or git-related content

This focuses on real problems that impact your application's reliability and maintainability.

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. 4d ago First seen · 44 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 76b92bd7c18c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review is a command published in the GitHub repository brennercruvinel/CCPlugins (2,780 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 383 tokens. 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.