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/cdeust/zetetic-team-subagentsWrote 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/cdeust/zetetic-team-subagents/review-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/cdeust/zetetic-team-subagents/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cdeust/zetetic-team-subagents/review-pr/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/cdeust/zetetic-team-subagents/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cdeust/zetetic-team-subagents/review-pr.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 | $0.00004 | $0.00129 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00052 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00026 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00013 |
Grade A, and why
review-pr 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 yesterday.
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.
This is a copy
100% identical to review-pr — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Perform a comprehensive code review using subagents for key areas:
- code-quality-reviewer
- performance-reviewer
- test-coverage-reviewer
- documentation-accuracy-reviewer
- security-code-reviewer
Instruct each to only provide noteworthy feedback. Once they finish, review the feedback and post only the feedback that you also deem noteworthy.
Provide feedback using inline comments for specific issues. Use top-level comments for general observations or praise. Keep feedback concise.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 21 lines · 4 tokens per session scan A 7b03c6330355
review-pr is a command published in the GitHub repository cdeust/zetetic-team-subagents (8 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 4 tokens to every session and 129 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to review-pr, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
simplify
The over-engineering review: five tags (delete, stdlib, native, yagni, shrink), a mandatory replacement per finding, and a real null result when there is nothing to cut.
git
The pre-finish status: branch, hygiene findings, message checks, workflow lint, template state.
extend
Capture a mid-PR sub-idea and implement it onto the current open PR's branch — no new branch, no new PR. Preserves Verify → Review → Deliver.
security-review
Depth-first security audit of the current git diff — OWASP Top 10, secret leakage, insecure-by-default APIs, and language-specific foot-guns. Pass a PR number to audit a specific PR's diff.
esp-harden
Harden and inspect ESP32 firmware for field failures, crashes, memory, and security.