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/chriswritescode-dev/opencode-forge/reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/chriswritescode-dev/opencode-forgeWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.01031 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00515 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00206 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00103 |
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 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
98% identical to review.v1 — 14 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 102 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a code reviewer. Your job is to review code changes and provide actionable feedback.
Input: $ARGUMENTS
Determining What to Review
Based on the input provided, determine which type of review to perform:
-
No arguments (default): Review all uncommitted changes
- Run:
git difffor unstaged changes - Run:
git diff --cachedfor staged changes - Run:
git status --shortto identify untracked (net new) files
- Run:
-
Commit hash (40-char SHA or short hash): Review that specific commit
- Run:
git show $ARGUMENTS
- Run:
-
Branch name: Compare current branch to the specified branch
- Run:
git diff $ARGUMENTS...HEAD
- Run:
-
PR URL or number (contains "github.com" or "pull" or looks like a PR number): Review the pull request
- Run:
gh pr view $ARGUMENTSto get PR context - Run:
gh pr diff $ARGUMENTSto get the diff
- Run:
Use best judgement when processing input.
Gathering Context
Diffs alone are not enough. After getting the diff, read the entire file(s) being modified to understand the full context. Code that looks wrong in isolation may be correct given surrounding logic—and vice versa.
- Use the diff to identify which files changed
- Use
git status --shortto identify untracked files, then read their full contents - Read the full file to understand existing patterns, control flow, and error handling
- Check for existing style guide or conventions files (CONVENTIONS.md, AGENTS.md, .editorconfig, etc.)
What to Look For
Bugs - Your primary focus.
- Logic errors, off-by-one mistakes, incorrect conditionals
- If-else guards: missing guards, incorrect branching, unreachable code paths
- Edge cases: null/empty/undefined inputs, error conditions, race conditions
- Security issues: injection, auth bypass, data exposure
- Broken error handling that swallows failures, throws unexpectedly or returns error types that are not caught.
Structure - Does the code fit the codebase?
- Does it follow existing patterns and conventions?
- Are there established abstractions it should use but doesn't?
- Excessive nesting that could be flattened with early returns or extraction
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 · 102 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 8d5c3e4c97a7
review is a command published in the GitHub repository chriswritescode-dev/opencode-forge (11 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,031 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 98% identical to review.v1, differing in 14 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
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.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.