Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to cloudrepo-io/founder-os. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cloudrepo-io/founder-os/master/.claude/commands/founder/review.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cloudrepo-io/founder-osWrote 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/cloudrepo-io/founder-os/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/cloudrepo-io/founder-os/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cloudrepo-io/founder-os/review/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/cloudrepo-io/founder-os/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cloudrepo-io/founder-os/review.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 | $0.00008 | $0.00779 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00390 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00156 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00078 |
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 9d 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 — 118 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Completed Work
Review work completed by the AI team and either approve or request changes.
Process
-
Check for pending reviews from two sources:
a. Completed implementations — files in
.claude/queue/completed/withoutreviewed: trueb. Research plans needing review — items in
.claude/queue/backlog.jsonwithstatus: "needs_review" -
If there are research plans needing review, show them first:
Research Plan Review
For each needs_review item:
- Read the plan file from
.claude/queue/plans/{id}.md - Show plan summary
Use AskUserQuestion:
- Question: "How would you like to proceed with this research plan?"
- Options:
- "Approve plan" - Accept and create implementation task (runs
/queue:approvelogic) - "Request revision" - Send back with feedback (runs
/queue:reviselogic) - "Skip for now" - Review later
- "View full plan" - Show complete plan document
- "Approve plan" - Accept and create implementation task (runs
If "Approve plan": Follow the /queue:approve workflow — update status, create implementation task, archive research task.
If "Request revision": Ask for specific feedback, then follow the /queue:revise workflow — add feedback, set to pending.
-
For each completed implementation item pending review:
- Read the completion report from
.claude/queue/reports/{id}.md - Show summary of what was done
- List files changed
- Show acceptance criteria status
- Read the completion report from
-
Ask for review decision:
Use AskUserQuestion:
- Question: "How would you like to proceed with [{title}]?"
- Options:
- "Approve" - Mark as reviewed and archive
- "Request changes" - Create follow-up task
- "Skip for now" - Review later
- "View details" - Show full report
Review Workflow
If Approved:
- Update the completed item with
reviewed: trueandreviewedAttimestamp - Move to archived section (keep in completed/ but mark as reviewed)
- Record in founder-actions.md under "Completed Reviews"
If Changes Requested:
- Ask for specific feedback
- Create a new work item in backlog with:
- Reference to original task
- Change requests as acceptance criteria
- Same owner (or reassign if needed)
- Update original task with
changesRequested: true
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 118 lines · 8 tokens per session scan A 724d2cbdeabf
review is a command published in the GitHub repository cloudrepo-io/founder-os (19 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 8 tokens to every session and 779 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
sdd-init
Initialize SDD context — detects project stack and bootstraps persistence backend.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.
argos
A command for checking whether an implementation matches its design deliverables. Its Korean description compares the work to the design as part of a completion inspection.
security-review
AI-powered security review of the current git diff (or specified paths). Dispatches the security-reviewer agent and prints findings grouped by severity.