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/queue/revise.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/revise)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/cloudrepo-io/founder-os/revise"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cloudrepo-io/founder-os/revise/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/revise"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/cloudrepo-io/founder-os/revise.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 | $0.00006 | $0.00538 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00215 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00108 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00054 |
Grade A, and why
revise 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 2mo 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 — 77 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Request Plan Revision
Request changes to a research plan that's in needs_review status. This creates a revision loop where the agent updates the plan based on feedback.
Arguments
$ARGUMENTS- (Optional) Task ID of the plan to revise. If not provided, show all plans awaiting review.
Process
-
Read
.claude/queue/backlog.jsonto find items withstatus: "needs_review" -
If no task ID provided:
- List all items with
needs_reviewstatus - Ask which plan to revise
- List all items with
-
If task ID provided (or after selection):
- Read the plan file at the item's
plan_filepath - Display the plan for context
- Read the plan file at the item's
-
Gather revision feedback:
Ask the user: "What changes do you want to the plan?"
Collect specific feedback. Good revision requests:
- "Consider approach X instead of Y"
- "The risk section doesn't address Z"
- "Split this into two phases"
- "Add more detail to the implementation steps"
- "What about impact on {system}?"
-
Update the research task:
{ "status": "pending", "revision_requested": true, "revision_count": {previous count + 1}, "revision_feedback": "Specific feedback from founder", "updated": "ISO timestamp" }Keep all other fields unchanged. The task stays in backlog with
pendingstatus so/queue:workwill pick it up again. -
Report:
- Revision requested for {task ID}
- Feedback recorded
- "The agent will pick this up on next
/queue:workand update the plan"
Revision Workflow
Plan created → needs_review → /queue:revise → pending (with feedback) → agent revises → needs_review → repeat or /queue:approve
How the Agent Handles Revisions
When /queue:work picks up a task with revision_requested: true:
- The agent reads the existing plan file
- Reads the
revision_feedback - Updates the plan to address the feedback
- Sets status back to
needs_review - Clears
revision_requested
This creates a natural review loop until the founder approves.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 77 lines · 6 tokens per session scan A 885b184a3a7a
revise is a command published in the GitHub repository cloudrepo-io/founder-os (24 stars, last pushed 9mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 6 tokens to every session and 538 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. 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.
revise compared with commands from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| revisecloudrepo-io/founder-os | Command | 24 | 9mo ago | MIT | A | 6 | Claude Code |
| checklistgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| clarifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 27 | Claude Code |
| specifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| analyzegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 26 | Claude Code |
| convergegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 35 | Claude Code |
| implementgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 14 | Claude Code |