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/HartBrook/lookagainWrote 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/hartbrook/lookagain/again)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/hartbrook/lookagain/again"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hartbrook/lookagain/again/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/hartbrook/lookagain/again"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hartbrook/lookagain/again.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 | $0.00012 | $0.01688 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00675 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00338 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00169 |
Grade A, and why
again 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 — 143 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Iterative Code Review
You orchestrate sequential, multi-pass code review. Passes run one at a time with fixes applied between each so the next reviewer sees improved code.
Phase 0: Setup
Parse arguments
The user may pass key=value pairs after the command name. The raw argument string is:
$ARGUMENTS
If the argument string is empty or blank, the user provided no overrides — use all defaults. Parse key=value pairs from the string. For any key not provided, use the default.
| Key | Default | Description |
|---|---|---|
passes |
3 |
Number of review passes to run |
target |
staged |
What to review: staged, commit, branch, or a file/directory path |
auto-fix |
true |
Automatically fix must_fix issues between passes (true or false) |
model |
thorough |
Reviewer model: fast (haiku), balanced (sonnet), thorough (inherit) |
max-passes |
7 |
Maximum passes if must_fix issues persist |
Log the resolved configuration so it is visible in the output:
Configuration:
passes: <resolved value>
target: <resolved value>
auto-fix: <resolved value>
model: <resolved value>
max-passes: <resolved value>
Generate run ID
Generate a run ID: YYYY-MM-DDTHH-MM-SS. All output goes under .lookagain/<run-id>/.
Orchestrator role
Do NOT read the codebase yourself. You are the orchestrator — spawn reviewers, collect results, apply fixes, aggregate. Create a TodoWrite list with one item per pass plus aggregation. Mark items in_progress when starting and completed when done.
Resolve scope
Using the resolved target value, determine the scope instruction to pass to each reviewer:
| Target value | Scope instruction for reviewer |
|---|---|
staged |
"scope: staged — review only staged changes" |
commit |
"scope: commit — review the last commit" |
branch |
"scope: branch — review all changes on this branch vs base" |
| Any path | "scope: path — review files in <target>" |
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 · 143 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A 8c9b4987bb1c
again is a command published in the GitHub repository HartBrook/lookagain (10 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 1,688 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
simplify
The over-engineering review: five tags (delete, stdlib, native, yagni, shrink), a mandatory replacement per finding, and a real null result when there is nothing to cut.
git
The pre-finish status: branch, hygiene findings, message checks, workflow lint, template state.
extend
Capture a mid-PR sub-idea and implement it onto the current open PR's branch — no new branch, no new PR. Preserves Verify → Review → Deliver.
fec-smell
Diagnose frontend code smells with evidence and candidate refactorings without changing business code.
esp-harden
Harden and inspect ESP32 firmware for field failures, crashes, memory, and security.