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/Helmi/claude-simoneWrote 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/helmi/claude-simone/code_review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/helmi/claude-simone/code_review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/helmi/claude-simone/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/helmi/claude-simone/code_review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/helmi/claude-simone/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 | $0.01270 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00508 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00254 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00127 |
Grade A, and why
code_review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- code_review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 128 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review - Execute top to bottom
Use the following instructions from top to bottom to execute a Code Review.
Create a TODO with EXACTLY these 7 Items
- Analyze the Scope given
- Find code changes within Scope
- Run automated quality checks (linting/type-checking)
- Find relevant Specification and Documentation
- Compare code changes against Documentation and Requirements
- Analyze possible differences
- Provide PASS/FAIL verdict with details
Follow step by step and adhere closely to the following instructions for each step.
DETAILS on every TODO item
1. Analyze the Scope given
check: <$ARGUMENTS>
If empty, use default, otherwise interpret <$ARGUMENTS> to identify the scope of the Review. Only continue if you can find meaningful changes to review.
CONTEXT: Before reviewing code changes:
- Read
.simone/00_PROJECT_MANIFEST.mdto understand current sprint and milestone context - Use the manifest to identify which sprint is active and what work is in scope
- Only evaluate against requirements appropriate for the current sprint's deliverables
2. Find code changes within Scope
With the identified Scope use git diff (on default: git diff HEAD~1) to find code changes.
3. Run automated quality checks (linting/type-checking)
Detect and run project's quality tools:
-
Python projects:
- If
pyproject.tomlwith tool configs: Check forruff,black,mypy,flake8,pylint - If
.ruff.tomlorruff.toml: Runruff check . - If
setup.cfgor.flake8: Runflake8 - Type checking: If
mypy.inior mypy in configs: Runmypy .
- If
-
JavaScript/TypeScript projects:
- If
package.jsonexists: Check "scripts" for "lint", "type-check", "format" - If
.eslintrc*exists: Run appropriate eslint command - If
tsconfig.jsonexists: Check for type-check script or runtsc --noEmit - If
.prettierrc*exists: Check formatting
- If
-
Other languages:
- Rust: If
Cargo.toml: Runcargo fmt --checkandcargo clippy - Go: If
go.mod: Rungo fmt ./...andgo vet ./... - Ruby: If
.rubocop.yml: Runrubocop - PHP: If
phpcs.xmlor.php-cs-fixer.php: Run appropriate tool
- Rust: If
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 · 128 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A cfcd0b9abe5c
code_review is a command published in the GitHub repository Helmi/claude-simone (559 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,270 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
refactor
Systematic code refactoring with smart scope detection.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
boot
Start a new PromptKit prompt assembly session (alias for /bootstrap).
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.