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/codelably/harmony-claude-code/go-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/codelably/harmony-claude-codeWhat 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 | $0.00032 | $0.01154 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00577 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00231 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00115 |
Grade A, and why
go-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 2d 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 — 149 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Go 代码审查 (Go Code Review)
此命令调用 go-reviewer 智能体 (Agent) 进行针对 Go 语言特性的全面代码审查。
此命令的作用
- 识别 Go 代码变更:通过
git diff查找已修改的.go文件 - 运行静态分析:执行
go vet、staticcheck和golangci-lint - 安全扫描:检查 SQL 注入、命令注入、竞态条件等安全隐患
- 并发审查:分析 Goroutine 安全、通道 (Channel) 使用、互斥锁 (Mutex) 模式
- 地道 Go 检查:验证代码是否遵循 Go 惯例和最佳实践
- 生成报告:按严重程度对问题进行分类
适用场景
在以下情况下使用 /go-review:
- 编写或修改 Go 代码后
- 提交 Go 代码变更前
- 审查包含 Go 代码的拉取请求 (Pull Request)
- 熟悉新的 Go 代码库
- 学习地道的 Go 模式
审查类别
致命 (CRITICAL) - 必须修复
- SQL/命令注入漏洞
- 未经同步的并发访问(竞态条件)
- Goroutine 泄露
- 硬编码的凭据
- 不安全的指针 (Unsafe Pointer) 使用
- 关键路径中被忽略的错误
高危 (HIGH) - 建议修复
- 缺失包含上下文 (Context) 的错误包装
- 使用 Panic 代替错误返回
- 上下文 (Context) 未透传
- 导致死锁的无缓冲通道
- 接口未实现错误
- 缺失互斥锁保护
中等 (MEDIUM) - 酌情考虑
- 非地道的代码模式
- 导出的标识符缺失 Godoc 注释
- 低效的字符串拼接
- 切片 (Slice) 未预分配容量
- 未使用表驱动测试 (Table-driven tests)
运行的自动化检查
# 静态分析
go vet ./...
# 高级检查(如果已安装)
staticcheck ./...
golangci-lint run
# 竞态检测
go build -race ./...
# 安全漏洞
govulncheck ./...
使用示例
用户: /go-review
智能体 (Agent):
# Go 代码审查报告 (Go Code Review Report)
## 已审查的文件
- internal/handler/user.go (已修改)
- internal/service/auth.go (已修改)
## 静态分析结果
✓ go vet: 无问题
✓ staticcheck: 无问题
## 发现的问题
[致命] 竞态条件 (Race Condition)
文件: internal/service/auth.go:45
问题: 未经同步访问共享 Map
```go
var cache = map[string]*Session{} // 并发访问!
func GetSession(id string) *Session {
return cache[id] // 竞态条件
}
修复: 使用 sync.RWMutex 或 sync.Map
var (
cache = map[string]*Session{}
cacheMu sync.RWMutex
)
func GetSession(id string) *Session {
cacheMu.RLock()
defer cacheMu.RUnlock()
return cache[id]
}
[高危] 缺失错误上下文 文件: internal/handler/user.go:28 问题: 返回错误时未包含上下文信息
return err // 缺失上下文
修复: 包装上下文信息
return fmt.Errorf("get user %s: %w", userID, err)
总结
- 致命 (CRITICAL): 1
- 高危 (HIGH): 1
- 中等 (MEDIUM): 0
建议: ❌ 在修复“致命”问题前禁止合并
## 批准标准
| 状态 | 条件 |
|--------|-----------|
| ✅ 批准 (Approve) | 无致命 (CRITICAL) 或高危 (HIGH) 问题 |
| ⚠️ 警告 (Warning) | 仅存在中等 (MEDIUM) 问题(谨慎合并) |
| ❌ 阻断 (Block) | 发现致命 (CRITICAL) 或高危 (HIGH) 问题 |
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 149 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 74f70b85edf3
go-review is a command published in the GitHub repository codelably/harmony-claude-code (42 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,154 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
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.
constitution
Create or update the project constitution from interactive or provided principle inputs.