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/dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-codeWrote 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/dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-code/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-code/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-code/code-review/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/dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-code/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-code/code-review.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 | $0.00038 | $0.01732 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00693 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00346 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00173 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 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 — 236 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Command
Perform comprehensive code review on branch changes with configurable depth levels.
Input Parsing
Parse $ARGUMENTS to extract branch, path, level, and optional task description:
Format: [branchpath] [level] [-- task-description]
Arguments:
- branch: Branch to review (auto-detected vs path)
- path: File or folder to filter (auto-detected vs branch)
- level: Review depth - high|medium|low (optional, default: high)
- -- task-description: Task description for matching analysis (optional)
- Target: Always main/master (auto-detected)
Examples:
- /acc:code-review # current branch, whole project, high
- /acc:code-review feature/payment # branch, whole project
- /acc:code-review src/Domain # current branch, only src/Domain
- /acc:code-review feature/payment src/Domain # branch + path
- /acc:code-review src/Domain medium # current branch, path, medium
- /acc:code-review feature/auth src/Auth -- JWT # full format
- /acc:code-review medium # current branch, medium
- /acc:code-review feature/payment low -- task # branch, low + task matching
Parsing rules:
- Split
$ARGUMENTSby--(space-dash-dash-space) - First part = arguments, Second part = task description
- In arguments, search for
high|medium|low→ this is level (default: high) - For each remaining argument:
- If exists as file/folder (test -e) → this is path
- Otherwise → this is branch
- Default branch: current via
git branch --show-current - Default path: . (whole project)
- Target → auto-detect main/master via
git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD
Pre-flight Checks
-
Verify git repository:
git rev-parse --git-dirIf not a git repo, report error and stop.
-
Determine review mode:
Check each non-level argument:
# If argument is a file or folder test -e "[argument]" && echo "PATH" || echo "BRANCH"
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 · 236 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 9883c33f53d6
code-review is a command published in the GitHub repository dykyi-roman/awesome-claude-code (105 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 1,732 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
speckit.spex.submit
Push and create PR for team review, with optional watch mode for CI monitoring.
git
The pre-finish status: branch, hygiene findings, message checks, workflow lint, template state.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
factory
Linha de montagem multi-agente (Software Factory) — spec-writer → builder em worktree isolado → 4 revisores paralelos (Security, Code, UI, UX) → approver com gate de risco e dashboard visual.
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.
release-tag
Create and push a version tag after a release PR has been merged.