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/hculap/better-codeWrote 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/hculap/better-code/checklist)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/hculap/better-code/checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hculap/better-code/checklist/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/hculap/better-code/checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hculap/better-code/checklist.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 | $0.00009 | $0.00519 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00208 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00104 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
checklist 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 — 62 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Checklist
Output the lightweight review checklist ready for copy/paste into PR comments or code reviews.
Checklist Output
## Code Review Checklist
### Quick Validation
- [ ] Can I explain this code in 30 seconds?
- [ ] File sizes within limits? (target: 100-300 LOC, warning: 400, critical: 800)
- [ ] Function sizes within limits? (target: 10-30 LOC, warning: 50, critical: 80)
- [ ] One responsibility per module/class?
### Code Quality
- [ ] No hidden global state or surprising side effects?
- [ ] Errors handled meaningfully (no silent failures)?
- [ ] No swallowed exceptions or empty catch blocks?
- [ ] Appropriate logging at boundaries?
### Configuration & Security
- [ ] Config validated at startup?
- [ ] No secrets or credentials in code?
- [ ] External input validated and sanitized?
- [ ] Using parameterized queries (if applicable)?
### Testing
- [ ] Tests cover the important behavior?
- [ ] Tests focus on behavior, not implementation?
- [ ] Edge cases and error paths tested?
### Style & Consistency
- [ ] Formatting/lint checks pass?
- [ ] Type checks pass (if applicable)?
- [ ] Naming is clear and consistent?
- [ ] Comments explain "why", not "what"?
### Principles Check
- [ ] **KISS**: Is this the simplest solution?
- [ ] **DRY**: No real duplication? (not premature abstraction)
- [ ] **YAGNI**: No features built "for later"?
- [ ] **SRP**: Each module has one reason to change?
Additional Context
If settings exist in .claude/code-standards.local.md, read them and adjust the thresholds in the checklist to match the project's configured limits.
For example, if strict thresholds are configured:
- Change "target: 100-300 LOC, max: 400-600" to "target: 100-200 LOC, max: 250"
- Change "target: 10-30 LOC, max: 50" to "target: 10-20 LOC, max: 30"
Output Format
Present the checklist in a clean, copyable format. If the user mentions they want it for a specific platform (GitHub PR, Jira, etc.), adjust formatting as needed.
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 · 62 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A 5f3b5fb13975
checklist is a command published in the GitHub repository hculap/better-code (2 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 519 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
sm-buff
You usually don't run buff directly — run sm sail. sm sail drives the whole PR to green and calls buff watch / triage for you, stopping only when it needs you to act (see /sm-sail). Reach for sm buff here only for surgical work: inspecting a specific failure, or resolving a single review thread when sail has parked on…
sm-scour
Run slop-mop's comprehensive pre-PR sweep for this repository.
latent-review
Quick latent review of code using structured hidden-state reasoning.
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.