Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to CRJFisher/ariadne. 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/CRJFisher/ariadne/main/.claude/commands/review-plan-for-task.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/CRJFisher/ariadneWrote 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/crjfisher/ariadne/review-plan-for-task)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/crjfisher/ariadne/review-plan-for-task"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/crjfisher/ariadne/review-plan-for-task/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/crjfisher/ariadne/review-plan-for-task"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/crjfisher/ariadne/review-plan-for-task.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00269 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00134 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00054 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00027 |
Grade A, and why
review-plan-for-task 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.
What it actually says
Please run reviewer subagents to analyse this plan, focussing on:
- information-architecture review - make sure the changes fit well with or evolve namings and architectural structure appropriately, including folder/file/function renamings, creations and removals.
- simplicty-review - are the planned code implementations as simple as possible? Could we make better use function-delegation or intermediary-data-models (translating data to a more useful format or data structure) to simplify the code?
- fundamentaility-review - making sure we're addressing the problem in the fundamental way possible
- language-specific coverage review
- make sure we have appropriate coverage for all languages which support this functionality
- include fixtures and integration tests that use the fixtures at all the appropriate integration testing levels
- if the changes include language-specific code handling, make sure its being handled by language-specific sub-modules and that the parent module is well-structured for language-specific dispatch. If there is no language-specific code handling, make sure the plan is well-structured for language-agnostic dispatch.
- are we including extra, unnecessary components e.g. data model fields? make sure we're not adding unnecessary complexity to the codebase. Apply the YAGNI principle
Synthesise the outputs of these agents into an updated plan and then update the task doc.
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 · 13 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 55aab7fa9ae9
review-plan-for-task is a command published in the GitHub repository CRJFisher/ariadne (22 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 269 tokens. 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
review
Fast review of staged changes. Critical findings only — no style nits.
pre-push
Run the full review skill on all changes since last push.
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.