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/cognitx-leyton/codegraph/review-prgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cognitx-leyton/codegraphWhat 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 | $0.00014 | $0.00383 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00192 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00077 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00038 |
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 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.
What it actually says
Code Review (Step 5)
Review all uncommitted changes. Fix issues found. Re-review until clean.
Review Loop
Round N:
1. Run code reviewer
Spawn the built-in feature-dev:code-reviewer agent on the changed files:
- Focus on: logic bugs, edge cases, security, inconsistencies with codebase patterns
- Only report HIGH confidence issues (>80%)
- Include file:line references
2. Run codegraph checks
cd codegraph
.venv/bin/codegraph arch-check # architecture conformance
Also run /dead-code to check for orphaned symbols introduced by the changes.
3. Run test suite
cd codegraph
.venv/bin/python -m pytest tests/ -q
4. Evaluate results
| Result | Action |
|---|---|
| Issues found | Fix them immediately, then go to Round N+1 |
| Tests failing | Fix the code or tests, then go to Round N+1 |
| Arch violations | Fix or document as acceptable, then go to Round N+1 |
| All clean | Exit loop |
Exit condition
The review loop exits when ALL of these are true:
- Code reviewer reports 0 high-confidence issues
arch-checkpasses (exit 0)- All tests pass
- No new dead code introduced
Report
Review Complete
---------------
Rounds: {N}
Issues found: {total across all rounds}
Issues fixed: {total fixed}
Tests: {N} passed
Arch-check: PASS
Ready for: /commit
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 · 67 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A c4193f57d34d
review-pr is a command published in the GitHub repository cognitx-leyton/codegraph (11 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 383 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
feedback
Security Design Review — PRD/기획서 기반 보안 의견서·검토 의견서 생성.
compliance
이전 보안 진단 보고서의 Finding들이 패치되었는지 확인하고, 변경된 코드에서 신규 취약점을 탐색합니다.
va
Vulnerability Assessment — 8차원 아키텍처 진단 + Self-Verify + Evidence Verification.
pentest
Penetration Testing — 시나리오 기반 모의해킹 + POC + 라이브 검증 (State Delta 기반).
redteam
Red Team Operations — 인프라 설정 보안 리뷰 + MITRE ATT&CK + Detection Engineering.
run
CH015 CISO에게 보안 진단을 지시합니다. 자연어로 요청하면 적절한 Division과 에이전트를 자동 할당합니다.