Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add gopherguides/gopher-ai/plugin install llm-toolsWrote 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/gopherguides/gopher-ai/review-loop)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/gopherguides/gopher-ai/review-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/gopherguides/gopher-ai/review-loop/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/gopherguides/gopher-ai/review-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/gopherguides/gopher-ai/review-loop.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 | $0.00016 | $0.03251 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.01300 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00650 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00325 |
Grade A, and why
review-loop scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 192 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Iterative LLM Review Loop
!if [ ! -x "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/setup-loop.sh" ]; then echo "ERROR: Plugin cache stale. Run /gopher-ai-refresh (or refresh-plugins.sh) and restart Claude Code."; exit 1; else "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/setup-loop.sh" "review-loop" "REVIEW_CLEAN" 25 "" '{"reviewing":"Resume the review-fix-verify cycle. Run the next review pass.","fixing":"Continue fixing: address remaining review findings, then verify.","verifying":"Continue verification: run build, test, and lint on fixes."}'; fi
1. Parse Arguments
Parse $ARGUMENTS to extract:
--llm <value>:codex(default),gemini,ollama,fable(Claude subagent — no external CLI)--max-passes <n>: max review passes (default: 5)--quick: usecodex reviewinstead ofcodex exec(faster, limited to 2-3 findings per pass; codex only)--tier <value>: gemini service tier (flex/standard/priority; gemini only; default: unset)- Remaining text: scope hint
Store as LLM_CHOICE, MAX_PASSES, QUICK_MODE (default false), GEMINI_TIER, SCOPE_HINT.
Cross-model default: the value of this review is a second model's perspective. When the diff was written by Claude (the usual case), keep the codex default. When the diff was written by Codex (wtcodex flows), prefer --llm fable so a different model family reviews the work.
Persist to .local/state/review-loop.loop.local.json via jq (merge args, pass: 0, quick_mode, gemini_tier) so the stop-hook can restore on re-entry. See ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/lib/review-loop/state-persist.md for the exact jq invocation; the same pattern repeats in Step 4c.
2. Prerequisite Check
Verify the selected LLM CLI is installed. CRITICAL: Never silently fail or fall back — always present the user with options via AskUserQuestion.
LLM_AVAILABLE=true
case "$LLM_CHOICE" in
codex) command -v codex >/dev/null 2>&1 && CODEX_CMD="codex" \
|| LLM_AVAILABLE=false ;;
gemini) command -v gemini >/dev/null 2>&1 || LLM_AVAILABLE=false ;;
ollama) command -v ollama >/dev/null 2>&1 || LLM_AVAILABLE=false ;;
fable) LLM_AVAILABLE=true ;; # no CLI — runs as a Claude subagent (see review-phase.md)
esac
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 · 192 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 029befecba1c
review-loop is a command published in the GitHub repository gopherguides/gopher-ai (21 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 3,251 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
pr-enhance
Command "pr-enhance" from ruvnet/ruflo, covering pr-enhance, usage, options, examples and enhance pr.
audio-pass
Functional audio review for implementation, mix coverage, clarity, and player feedback.
test-value-review
Use when a diff adds or changes test files, when a PR claims coverage for config, CI workflows, templates, or HTML output, or when tests look written only to satisfy a "must have tests" rule; not for Playwright selector or performance hygiene (use /playwright-review).
auditar-refactor
Invoca refactor-safety-auditor — gate canônico antes de qualquer refactor. Coleta evidências (linhas, contrato externo, coverage, mutation) e retorna veredito GO/BLOCK/WARN/GO-OVERRIDE.
quality-check-command
This command performs comprehensive code quality checks. Use it before commits or when implementation is complete.
bug-check
Run automated tests and build checks first, then agent code review. For each bug found, propose or document a regression test.