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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/devMappouras/local-code-review-claude-pluginWrote 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/devmappouras/local-code-review-claude-plugin/local-code-review-tests)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/devmappouras/local-code-review-claude-plugin/local-code-review-tests"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/devmappouras/local-code-review-claude-plugin/local-code-review-tests/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/devmappouras/local-code-review-claude-plugin/local-code-review-tests"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/devmappouras/local-code-review-claude-plugin/local-code-review-tests.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 | $0.00013 | $0.01736 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00694 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00347 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00174 |
Grade A, and why
local-code-review-tests 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 1mo 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 — 189 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Perform a local code review on uncommitted changes with full build and test verification.
Follow these steps precisely:
-
Check for uncommitted changes: Run
git statusto verify there are uncommitted changes. If there are no changes (working tree clean), inform the user and stop. -
Detect project type: Use Glob to find:
.slnfiles (search current directory and up to 3 parent levels)angular.jsonfiles (indicates Angular project)- Store the paths for later use
-
Detect test projects: Use Glob and Grep to find test projects:
- Search for
.csprojfiles containingNUnitorxunitorMSTestpackage references - Note: Test projects typically have names ending in
.Testsor.UnitTests - Store test project paths for later use
- Search for
-
Gather CLAUDE.md files: Use a Haiku agent to find all relevant CLAUDE.md files:
- Root CLAUDE.md (if exists)
- Any CLAUDE.md files in directories containing modified files
- Return a list of file paths (not contents)
-
Get uncommitted changes: Run
git diff HEADto get all uncommitted changes (both staged and unstaged). Use a Haiku agent to summarize what files changed and the nature of changes. -
Launch parallel review agents: Launch 4 parallel Sonnet agents to independently review the changes. Each agent should return a list of issues with:
- Issue description
- File and line number
- Reason (CLAUDE.md compliance, bug, security, best practice)
- Confidence score (0-100)
Agent #1 - CLAUDE.md Compliance: Audit changes against CLAUDE.md guidelines. Focus on project-specific rules and conventions.
Agent #2 - Bug Detection: Shallow scan for obvious bugs in the changes only. Focus on:
- Null reference issues
- Resource leaks
- Logic errors
- Async/await misuse
- Exception handling problems Ignore pre-existing issues and false positives.
Agent #3 - .NET Best Practices (if .sln detected): Review for:
- Clean Architecture violations
- SOLID principle violations
- Async/await anti-patterns
- Dependency injection issues
- Entity Framework misuse
- Security vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, etc.)
Agent #4 - Angular Best Practices (if angular.json detected): Review for:
- Component design issues
- RxJS anti-patterns (memory leaks, improper subscriptions)
- Change detection issues
- Template security (XSS)
- Performance issues (large bundles, unnecessary re-renders)
-
Build .NET project (if .sln detected):
- Run
dotnet restoreon the solution - Run
dotnet buildon the solution - Capture any build errors or warnings
- If build fails, report the errors with root cause analysis but continue with the review
- Run
-
Build Angular project (if angular.json detected):
- Run
ng buildornpm run build - Capture any build errors
- If build fails, report the errors with root cause analysis but continue with the review
- Run
-
Run .NET unit tests (if test projects detected):
- Run
dotnet teston detected test projects (or entire solution) - Use
--no-buildflag if build already succeeded - Capture test results:
- Total tests
- Passed tests
- Failed tests
- Skipped tests
- If tests fail, capture failure details (test name, error message, stack trace)
- Run
-
Run Angular tests (if angular.json detected and test scripts available):
- Run
ng test --watch=false --browsers=ChromeHeadlessornpm run test -- --watch=false - Capture test results
- If tests fail, capture failure details
- Run
-
Score issues: For each issue found in step 6, launch a parallel Haiku agent to score confidence (0-100):
- 0: False positive, doesn't stand up to scrutiny, or pre-existing issue
- 25: Might be real, but could be false positive. Stylistic issue not in CLAUDE.md
- 50: Real issue but minor or nitpick. Not very important relative to PR
- 75: Verified real issue that will be hit in practice. Important or explicitly in CLAUDE.md
- 100: Absolutely certain, confirmed real issue that happens frequently
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 189 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 78b21f6a0c94
local-code-review-tests is a command published in the GitHub repository devMappouras/local-code-review-claude-plugin (1 stars, last pushed 10mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 1,736 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
converge
Run an unattended review→fix→re-review loop on the current branch until the reviewer has no findings at or above Medium, then push once. Findings stay in a local scratch file and are never posted to GitHub. Stops early on oscillation, a red test suite, or a 4-review cap.
review
Review the current git diff — auditor selected by --mode (general, security, a11y, deps, perf, tests, contributor-trust, ux) or auto-inferred from the diff when omitted. Pass a PR number to review a specific PR; use --check-followup to re-check a PR after the owner has addressed feedback.
clean-oop
Apply SOLID, Clean Code, dependency boundaries, and testability.
octo-deliver
Delivery phase - Review, validate, and test with multi-AI quality assurance.
dart-review-pr
review a PR or address review feedback.
generate-widget
Génération Widget Flutter avec Tests.