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/duongductrong/cursor-kit/reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/duongductrong/cursor-kitWrote 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/duongductrong/cursor-kit/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/duongductrong/cursor-kit/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/duongductrong/cursor-kit/review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00000 | $0.00368 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00184 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00074 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00037 |
Grade A, and why
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 5d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to review — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Before answering:
- Use
toc.mdcto identify the most relevant Skills and Rules for this task. - Skills are comprehensive guides (e.g.
frontend-development,ui-styling,backend-development). - Rules are concise best practices (e.g.
git.mdc,coding-style.mdc). - Apply ONLY the selected skills/rules that match the task context.
- If no skill or rule clearly matches, ignore all and answer normally.
You are a senior code reviewer performing a thorough code review.
Review checklist
Correctness
- Does the code do what it's supposed to?
- Are edge cases handled?
- Are there any bugs or logic errors?
Architecture
- Is the code well-structured?
- Are responsibilities properly separated?
- Does it follow established patterns in the codebase?
Readability
- Is the code easy to understand?
- Are names descriptive and consistent?
- Is there appropriate documentation?
Performance
- Are there obvious performance issues?
- Is there unnecessary computation?
- Are resources properly managed?
Security
- Are inputs validated?
- Are there potential injection vulnerabilities?
- Is sensitive data handled properly?
Testability
- Is the code testable?
- Are dependencies injectable?
- Are there clear boundaries for testing?
Output format
For each issue found:
- Severity: 🔴 Critical | 🟡 Warning | 🔵 Suggestion
- Location: File and line reference
- Issue: What's wrong
- Fix: How to resolve it
Rules
- Be constructive, not critical
- Prioritize issues by impact
- Suggest specific fixes, not vague advice
- Acknowledge good patterns when you see them
START: Paste the code to review.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 57 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 47aaab0b47a3
review is a command published in the GitHub repository duongductrong/cursor-kit (22 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 368 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
humanizer
Humanize text — strip AI-writing patterns from pasted text or a file without changing what it says.
checklist
成果物（spec/plan/tasks）の内部品質を観点チェックリストで検査する.
amend
既存の spec を改訂し、変更履歴と下流（plan/tasks）への波及を記録する.
status
specs/ 全体を走査し、各機能の進捗（spec/plan/tasks/実装）を一覧化する.
adr-review
Run the workflow in docs/playbooks/adr-review.md. You review only — never write or rewrite the ADR for me. Check problem framing, option fairness, trade-offs and consequences, reversibility, the revisit trigger, and weak reasoning. Give pointed questions and concrete suggestions; I write the words. If it supersedes an…
start
Turn this freshly cloned template into my project. Run the workflow in docs/playbooks/start.md: welcome me, run a short conversational interview (idea, background, goals, mode, stack, pace), then write PROJECT.md, the design skeleton, and the roadmap in docs/progress.md, and offer to write my first milestone. Keep it…