Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to hollandkevint/thinkhaven. 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/hollandkevint/thinkhaven/main/.claude/commands/BMad/tasks/review-story.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hollandkevint/thinkhavenWrote 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/hollandkevint/thinkhaven/review-story)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/hollandkevint/thinkhaven/review-story"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hollandkevint/thinkhaven/review-story/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/hollandkevint/thinkhaven/review-story"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hollandkevint/thinkhaven/review-story.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 | $0.01146 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00573 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00229 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00115 |
Grade A, and why
review-story 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 11d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to review-story — 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 — 159 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/review-story Task
When this command is used, execute the following task:
review-story
When a developer agent marks a story as "Ready for Review", perform a comprehensive senior developer code review with the ability to refactor and improve code directly.
Prerequisites
- Story status must be "Review"
- Developer has completed all tasks and updated the File List
- All automated tests are passing
Review Process
-
Read the Complete Story
- Review all acceptance criteria
- Understand the dev notes and requirements
- Note any completion notes from the developer
-
Verify Implementation Against Dev Notes Guidance
- Review the "Dev Notes" section for specific technical guidance provided to the developer
- Verify the developer's implementation follows the architectural patterns specified in Dev Notes
- Check that file locations match the project structure guidance in Dev Notes
- Confirm any specified libraries, frameworks, or technical approaches were used correctly
- Validate that security considerations mentioned in Dev Notes were implemented
-
Focus on the File List
- Verify all files listed were actually created/modified
- Check for any missing files that should have been updated
- Ensure file locations align with the project structure guidance from Dev Notes
-
Senior Developer Code Review
- Review code with the eye of a senior developer
- If changes form a cohesive whole, review them together
- If changes are independent, review incrementally file by file
- Focus on:
- Code architecture and design patterns
- Refactoring opportunities
- Code duplication or inefficiencies
- Performance optimizations
- Security concerns
- Best practices and patterns
-
Active Refactoring
- As a senior developer, you CAN and SHOULD refactor code where improvements are needed
- When refactoring:
- Make the changes directly in the files
- Explain WHY you're making the change
- Describe HOW the change improves the code
- Ensure all tests still pass after refactoring
- Update the File List if you modify additional files
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 159 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A c7baf0d033ae
review-story is a command published in the GitHub repository hollandkevint/thinkhaven (5 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,146 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to review-story, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
sdd-init
Initialize SDD context — detects project stack and bootstraps persistence backend.
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 }}.
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.
argos
A command for checking whether an implementation matches its design deliverables. Its Korean description compares the work to the design as part of a completion inspection.