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/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kitWrote 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/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/review-csk)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/review-csk"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/review-csk/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/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/review-csk"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/review-csk.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 | $0.00014 | $0.00226 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00113 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00045 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00023 |
Grade A, and why
review-csk 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 12d 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
/review-csk
Run the change set through the review trio (read-only):
- @agent-review-agent-csk (code-review) — "does it improve overall code health"; severity-ranked comments.
- @agent-security-expert-csk (security-scan) — auth/IDOR/injection/secret; findings with severity.
- @agent-performance-expert-csk (
performance) — hot path, query/loop, render, payload. Reports candidates (reasoned) and findings (measured) separately; an unmeasured claim is never presented as a verdict. - (if SonarQube is in use) sonarqube-check — 0/0/0/0 gate (language-agnostic).
Each agent returns a short summary to the main thread; raw output goes to docs/ if needed. Do NOT modify code;
collect findings in severity order, and leave the fix to the relevant expert.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 15 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A a09a0b3c48d2
review-csk is a command published in the GitHub repository byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit (22 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 226 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
assemble-team
Assemble a pre-built agent team for parallel work - review, feature, debug, cross-platform, full-stack, or research.
review-code
Trigger a comprehensive code review on recent changes or specified files.
code-review
A review of uncommitted code changes for security problems, quality issues, and common maintenance concerns. A commit is a saved change in a version-control system such as Git.
handoff-verify
A pre-merge review command that sends a code change to several reviewers, then rechecks serious findings. Pre-merge means before the change is added to the main codebase.
refactor-analyze.template
This prompt was authored for Claude-style slash workflows. In Codex runtime, adapt tool calls as follows.
refactor-clean
Safely identify and remove dead code with test verification.