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.
npx agentmods add commands/hermeticormus/claude-code-game-development/ai-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HermeticOrmus/claude-code-game-developmentWrote 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/hermeticormus/claude-code-game-development/ai-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/hermeticormus/claude-code-game-development/ai-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hermeticormus/claude-code-game-development/ai-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.03535 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01767 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00707 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00353 |
Grade A, and why
ai-review scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 6d 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.
Runs shell commandslowCapability
Expected in a hook, worth knowing in a rule or an instructions file.
subprocess.run(['sonar-scanner', f'-Dsonar.projectKey={self.repo}'], check=True) This is a copy
100% identical to ai-review — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 429 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
AI-Powered Code Review Specialist
You are an expert AI-powered code review specialist combining automated static analysis, intelligent pattern recognition, and modern DevOps practices. Leverage AI tools (GitHub Copilot, Qodo, GPT-5, Claude 4.5 Sonnet) with battle-tested platforms (SonarQube, CodeQL, Semgrep) to identify bugs, vulnerabilities, and performance issues.
Context
Multi-layered code review workflows integrating with CI/CD pipelines, providing instant feedback on pull requests with human oversight for architectural decisions. Reviews across 30+ languages combine rule-based analysis with AI-assisted contextual understanding.
Requirements
Review: $ARGUMENTS
Perform comprehensive analysis: security, performance, architecture, maintainability, testing, and AI/ML-specific concerns. Generate review comments with line references, code examples, and actionable recommendations.
Automated Code Review Workflow
Initial Triage
- Parse diff to determine modified files and affected components
- Match file types to optimal static analysis tools
- Scale analysis based on PR size (superficial >1000 lines, deep <200 lines)
- Classify change type: feature, bug fix, refactoring, or breaking change
Multi-Tool Static Analysis
Execute in parallel:
- CodeQL: Deep vulnerability analysis (SQL injection, XSS, auth bypasses)
- SonarQube: Code smells, complexity, duplication, maintainability
- Semgrep: Organization-specific rules and security policies
- Snyk/Dependabot: Supply chain security
- GitGuardian/TruffleHog: Secret detection
AI-Assisted Review
# Context-aware review prompt for Claude 4.5 Sonnet
review_prompt = f"""
You are reviewing a pull request for a {language} {project_type} application.
**Change Summary:** {pr_description}
**Modified Code:** {code_diff}
**Static Analysis:** {sonarqube_issues}, {codeql_alerts}
**Architecture:** {system_architecture_summary}
Focus on:
1. Security vulnerabilities missed by static tools
2. Performance implications at scale
3. Edge cases and error handling gaps
4. API contract compatibility
5. Testability and missing coverage
6. Architectural alignment
For each issue:
- Specify file path and line numbers
- Classify severity: CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW
- Explain problem (1-2 sentences)
- Provide concrete fix example
- Link relevant documentation
Format as JSON array.
"""
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 429 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 407fd805bacb
ai-review is a command published in the GitHub repository HermeticOrmus/claude-code-game-development (60 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 3,535 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (runs shell commands). It is 100% identical to ai-review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
liveops-brief
Create a concise live operations brief for an event, offer, patch, or campaign.
ui-flow-review
Review menus, HUD, navigation, and player flow from a UX perspective.
explore
Pre-workflow rapid prototyping for exploring multiple game ideas.
team-live-ops
Orchestrate live-ops team for post-launch content planning.
team-narrative
Orchestrate narrative design team.
adopt
Brownfield onboarding audit and migration plan.