Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to HelixDevelopment/code. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/HelixDevelopment/code/main/.specify/extensions/superspec/commands/review.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HelixDevelopment/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/helixdevelopment/code/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/helixdevelopment/code/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/helixdevelopment/code/review/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/helixdevelopment/code/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/helixdevelopment/code/review.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 | $0.00388 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00194 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00078 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00039 |
Grade A, and why
review 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 4d 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
speckit.superspec.review
Run code review against spec requirements using review skills.
Usage
/speckit.superspec.review [scope]
Scope: Optional file paths, spec number, or "all changes". Defaults to the latest feature.
Process
- Read the spec and plan for the feature being reviewed
- Superpowers detection: Check for
requesting-code-reviewskill- If found: Read the skill and follow its pre-evaluation checklist and review dispatch protocol
- If not found: Use the built-in review protocol below
- Built-in review protocol:
- Spec compliance: Verify each acceptance scenario from the spec is implemented
- Edge case coverage: Verify brainstormed edge cases are handled
- Constitution compliance: Check all governance principles are respected
- Code quality: Check for bugs, security issues, error handling
- Test coverage: Verify tests exist for critical paths
- Report findings with confidence scores (0-100, only report issues >= 80)
- Group findings by severity: Critical > Important > Suggestion
Output
Review findings reported to user. Optionally written to
specs/NNN-feature-name/checklist-review.md.
Finding Format
Each finding includes:
- Clear description with confidence score
- File path and line reference
- Specific recommendation or fix suggestion
Findings below 80 confidence are suppressed to reduce noise.
Superpowers Adaptation
When using the requesting-code-review skill, adapt its outputs:
- Add superspec-specific review dimensions: spec compliance, constitution compliance, brainstorm coverage
- Output location → report to user, optionally write to checklist file
See references/superpowers-bridge.md for full adaptation rules.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 51 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 96f891a89350
review is a command published in the GitHub repository HelixDevelopment/code (2 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 388 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 2026-09-04.
Other commands, from other repositories
refactor-clean
You are a code refactoring expert specializing in clean code principles, SOLID design patterns, and modern software engineering best practices. Analyze and refactor the provided code to improve its quality, maintainability, and performance.
proof-capture
Capture PR-ready proof artifacts for a feature, with an attested fail-closed controller in strict mode.
debug-screen
Diagnose why the current screen is broken, showing unexpected content, or crashing. Gathers parallel evidence from all layers and applies a targeted fix.
refactor-clean
Safely identify and remove dead code with verification after each change.
perf-profile.template
This prompt was authored for Claude-style slash workflows. In Codex runtime, adapt tool calls as follows.
post
Post the current OCR review to a GitHub PR.