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/higoralves/orc/code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HigorAlves/orcWhat 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 | $0.00045 | $0.04177 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.02089 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00835 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00418 |
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 2d 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 — 277 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/orc:code-review
Review a pull request authored by someone else. Default behavior: post a real GitHub PR review with inline comments anchored to the right files and lines, optional one-click suggestion blocks, and a review event determined mechanically from finding severities.
The agents (orc-pr-reviewer, orc-security-reviewer) return structured JSON findings. This command merges them, sanity-checks for verdict-vs-severity contradictions, shows a preview, and posts via gh api (or the GitHub MCP if available).
Arguments
<pr-number-or-url>— required (unless--prsis given). Either123(current repo),org/repo#123, or a full URL.--prs a#1,b#2,...— workspace mode: review a set of linked PRs as one logical change. Each entry isrepo#pror full URL. Findings are tagged with[repo:<name>]and the merge order from the workspace plan is surfaced in the summary. Mutually exclusive with the positional<pr-number-or-url>.--context <description>— optional. Describes what the PR is supposed to accomplish, used for requirements-alignment checks.--summary-only— produce the legacy text-block markdown summary instead of posting inline. For when you want markdown to paste elsewhere or don't want to auto-post. Skips Phases 5–7.--soft-tests—test-severity findings drop to COMMENT instead of forcing REQUEST_CHANGES. Use for repos with weak test culture or PRs you explicitly want to land despite test gaps.--dry-run— runs through Phase 6 (preview) but never posts. The constructed payload is echoed as JSON for inspection. Useful for testing or for reviews you want to inspect locally before deciding.--include-nits— keepnit-severity findings (default: drop them). Bumps comment count but doesn't change the event.--audit— repo-wide security audit instead of a PR review. No PR ref required (and the diff-scoping phases are skipped). Dispatchesorc-security-reviewerin audit scope — whole working tree via Glob/Grep, the "introduced by this change" rule suspended — plus a secret-scanning step. Nothing is posted to GitHub; output is a markdown summary. See "Audit mode" below.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 277 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 9b9580c9ebf3
code-review is a command published in the GitHub repository HigorAlves/orc (6 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 4,177 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 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
setup
Set up Postman MCP Server. Authenticate via OAuth or API key, verify connection, select workspace.
test
Run Postman collection tests, analyze results, diagnose failures, and suggest fixes.
refine-title
深度分析 Issue 或 PR 内容，并将其标题重构为 Conventional Commits 格式.
get-flow-run
Inspect a Postman Flow run by its Run ID — per-block logs, failing block, and status.
warden-cost
Dollar accounting — what does each active rule actually save, in money? Translates the token-measured verdict into dollars using a price table and the agent's own token-type mix, with a per-session net and a break-even. Read-only; spends no tokens.
routine
Execute one maintenance routine defined in scv/routines/ .md (task + guardrails + exit-criteria contract), or list defined routines. SCV never schedules — pair with host features like /loop or cron yourself. Use whenever the user asks to run a recurring maintenance task, or asks what routines exist — not only when…