A command for systematically reviewing code changes for correctness, security, quality, and tests. It groups findings by seriousness and location and applies relevant project rules.

Use it on the current changes or selected files before merging to get categorized findings and suggested improvements.

It gives a structured review checklist so important bugs, security risks, and missing tests are less likely to be overlooked.

code-review — Command for coding agents by HKTITAN: A command for systematically reviewing code changes for correctness…

Install

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.

agentmods

npx agentmods add commands/hktitan/cursor-best-practices/code-review

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HKTITAN/cursor-best-practices

Wrote 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.

README.md

[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hktitan/cursor-best-practices/code-review.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/commands/hktitan/cursor-best-practices/code-review)

Your own site

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/hktitan/cursor-best-practices/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hktitan/cursor-best-practices/code-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Per session 0 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.

When invoked 310 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.

Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.

Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.

Token cost

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	$0.00000	$0.00310
Opus 5	$0.00000	$0.00155
Sonnet 5	$0.00000	$0.00062
Haiku 4.5	$0.00000	$0.00031

Measured 4d ago against content hash ff853c57efe6, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

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 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.

cursor-best-practices/assets/templates/commands/code-review.md · 37 lines

What it actually says

Review the code changes in this conversation (or the files I've @-mentioned) systematically.

Checklist

Correctness
- Logic and control flow; edge cases and error paths.
- Potential bugs, off-by-ones, null/undefined access.
- Concurrency or async issues if relevant.
Security
- Injection (SQL, NoSQL, command, XSS).
- Auth/authz (broken access control, insecure session handling).
- Sensitive data (logging secrets, hardcoded credentials, insecure storage).
Quality
- Readability, naming, and structure.
- Adherence to project conventions (see .cursor/rules or AGENTS.md).
- Duplication, dead code, or unnecessary complexity.
Tests
- Adequacy of coverage for the changes.
- Test quality (behavior vs implementation, meaningful assertions).

Output format

For each finding:

Critical — Must fix before merge. Describe the issue, location, and suggested fix.
Suggestion — Consider improving. Briefly explain why and how.
Nice to have — Optional improvement.

Group by severity, then by file or area. If there are no issues in a category, say so (e.g. "No critical security issues found").

Apply project rules

Use any project rules in .cursor/rules or AGENTS.md when relevant (e.g. testing style, API conventions, security requirements).

Changes

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 · 37 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A ff853c57efe6

Subscribe to this mod's changes

code-review is a command published in the GitHub repository HKTITAN/cursor-best-practices (5 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 310 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 2026-08-31.

Code review agent agent-skills best-practices cursor cursor-ide cursor-rules

code-review

Getting it into your agent

Wrote this? Show the measurements

What it costs to keep this loaded

Grade A, and why

Nothing flagged

What it actually says

Checklist

Output format

Apply project rules

What this file has done since we first saw it

Other commands, from other repositories

commit-msg

handle-pr-comments

self-review

create-pr

back-to-master-delete-branch

optimize-cursor-context