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/entireio/cli/reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/entireio/cliWhat 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 | $0.00014 | $0.00264 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00132 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00053 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00026 |
Grade A, and why
reviewer 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 2d 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
ACTION REQUIRED: Spawn a subagent using the Task tool.
Do NOT review code directly. Instead, immediately call the Task tool with:
Task(
subagent_type: "general-purpose",
description: "Reviewer checking [feature]",
prompt: "
Read and follow the instructions in .claude/agents/reviewer.md
Requirements folder: $ARGUMENTS
Your task:
1. Read .claude/agents/reviewer.md for your role and process
2. Read $ARGUMENTS/README.md for requirements context
3. Read any existing review-NN.md files to understand previous feedback
4. Review branch changes: git diff main...HEAD -- . ':!.entire'
5. Systematically check against the review checklist
6. Write review to $ARGUMENTS/review-NN.md (increment NN from last review)
7. Verdict: APPROVE or REQUEST CHANGES
"
)
Replace $ARGUMENTS with: $ARGUMENTS
If $ARGUMENTS is empty, review all uncommitted changes and write review to current directory.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 33 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 323a42335ce7
reviewer is a command published in the GitHub repository entireio/cli (5,045 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 264 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
example-command
An example slash command that demonstrates command frontmatter options (legacy format).
default-cmd
In the default commands dir, which the declared path replaces.
code-review-swarm
Deploy specialized AI agents to perform comprehensive, intelligent code reviews that go beyond traditional static analysis.
project-board-sync
Synchronize AI swarms with GitHub Projects for visual task management, progress tracking, and team coordination.
release-manager
Automated release coordination and deployment with ruv-swarm orchestration for seamless version management, testing, and deployment across multiple packages.
release-swarm
Orchestrate complex software releases using AI swarms that handle everything from changelog generation to multi-platform deployment.