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/echoingvesper/mcp-task-orchestrator/review-generalgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/EchoingVesper/mcp-task-orchestratorWrote 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/echoingvesper/mcp-task-orchestrator/review-general)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/echoingvesper/mcp-task-orchestrator/review-general"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/echoingvesper/mcp-task-orchestrator/review-general.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 | $0.00597 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00298 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00119 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00060 |
Grade A, and why
review-general 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.
Copies of this mod
4 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- prp-core-review — 94% identical, 186 lines differ
- review-general — 94% identical, 186 lines differ
- review-staged-unstaged — 86% identical, 178 lines differ
- review-staged-unstaged — 86% identical, 18 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 94 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
Please perform a comprehensive code review of the current changes or specified files.
Review Scope
$ARGUMENTS
Review Process
- Understand Changes
- If reviewing staged changes:
git diff --staged - If reviewing specific files: Read the specified files
- If reviewing a PR:
gh pr view $ARGUMENTS --json files,additions,deletions - If reviewing a local directory:
git diff $ARGUMENTS - If reviewing the entire codebase:
git diff origin/main
- If reviewing staged changes:
Review Focus Areas
-
Code Quality
- Type hints on all functions and classes
- Pydantic v2 models for data validation
- No print() statements (use logging)
- Proper error handling
- Following PEP 8
- Docstrings following google style python docstrings
-
Pydantic v2 Patterns
- Using ConfigDict not class Config
- field_validator not @validator
- model_dump() not dict()
- Proper use of Annotated types
-
Security
- Input validation on all endpoints
- No SQL injection vulnerabilities
- Passwords properly hashed
- No hardcoded secrets
-
Structure
- Unit tests are co-located with the code they test in tests/ folders
- Each feature is self-contained with its own models, service, and tools
- Shared components are only things used by multiple features
- Future improvements (like multiple AI providers) would go in src/shared/ai_providers/ when implemented
- Integration tests remain at the root level in tests/integration/
-
Linting
- ruff check --fix
- mypy
-
Testing
- New code has tests
- Edge cases covered
- Mocking external dependencies
-
Performance
- No N+1 queries
- Efficient algorithms
- Proper async usage
-
Documentation
- Clear README with setup instructions
- CLAUDE.md is up to date with any new important utils, dependencies etc for future cluade code instances
Review Output
Create a concise review report with:
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 · 94 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 91c7db43e5bb
review-general is a command published in the GitHub repository EchoingVesper/mcp-task-orchestrator (28 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 597 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
workpm
PM 모드로 오케스트레이터 시작. 팀을 구성하고 5단계 워크플로우로 작업을 완수합니다.
proyecto
Declara el proyecto activo (scope global) para atribucion de coste/horas en agentactions. Sin argumento, muestra el proyecto actual.
argos
설계 산출물 대비 구현 검증 — 준공검사 감리 (아르고스).
handover
Works for you. Go outside and live. — AI orchestrator that auto-routes tasks to the cheapest model that solves them. 70% run free on local models. Self-auditing, self-improving, zero prompting skill needed. Built with vibe coding by a finance student. Your models, your data.
instinct-status
Shows learned instincts from dqiii8.db, grouped by project and confidence. Internal diagnostic tool — not for user invocation.
test-team
Works for you. Go outside and live. — AI orchestrator that auto-routes tasks to the cheapest model that solves them. 70% run free on local models. Self-auditing, self-improving, zero prompting skill needed. Built with vibe coding by a finance student. Your models, your data.