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/epam/ai-dial-ui-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/epam/ai-dial-ui-kit/review-changes)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/epam/ai-dial-ui-kit/review-changes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/epam/ai-dial-ui-kit/review-changes/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/epam/ai-dial-ui-kit/review-changes"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/epam/ai-dial-ui-kit/review-changes.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00152 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00061 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00030 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00015 |
Grade A, and why
review-changes 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 25d 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
/review-changes
Alias for /code-review kept for backwards compatibility with the existing
/feature-pipeline workflow.
Run the code-reviewer agent as defined in agents/code-reviewer.md (root
of the repo). Read that file first and follow it verbatim — rubric, output
format, and the "must not do" list live there.
Scope: changes since divergence from origin/development (or files explicitly
named by the user). Output the standard three-section report
(### Summary / ### Must-fix / ### Nice-to-have) and finish with the
handoff hint to /apply-review.
This command is review-only. Do not edit files.
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.
- 25d ago First seen · 16 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A d92e7bf97748
review-changes is a command published in the GitHub repository epam/ai-dial-ui-kit (10 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 152 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 2026-09-19.
Other commands, from other repositories
review-prs
Parallel PR triage: decide merge-worthiness, prepare rebased worktrees, fix blockers, return them for human merge.
pr
Open a pull request with a description generated from the diff.
ship
Pre-ship pipeline — test, review, then prepare a clean commit.
pr-shepherd
Take every open PR end-to-end — diagnose, fix mechanical failures, stop at the merge gate.
audit
Audit a window of recent commits for real defects, confirm each finding before fixing, verify every surface a fix touches, then report confirmed/dismissed/no-op with evidence. Enforces Law 4 (Verify Before Reporting).
gsd:inbox
Triage and review open GitHub issues and PRs against project templates and contribution guidelines.