Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to JacobCoffee/debug-toolbar. 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/JacobCoffee/debug-toolbar/main/.claude/commands/review.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/JacobCoffee/debug-toolbarWrote 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/jacobcoffee/debug-toolbar/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/jacobcoffee/debug-toolbar/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jacobcoffee/debug-toolbar/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 | $0.00006 | $0.00924 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00462 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00001 | $0.00185 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00092 |
Grade A, and why
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 — 186 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Workflow
You are reviewing the implementation of: $ARGUMENTS
Pre-Review Checklist
- Load PRD from
specs/active/{slug}/prd.md - Load quality gates from
specs/guides/quality-gates.yaml - Review all modified files
- Check test coverage
Critical Rules
- ALL GATES MUST PASS - No exceptions
- PATTERN EXTRACTION - Capture new patterns
- ANTI-PATTERN SCAN - Check for violations
- DOCUMENTATION UPDATE - Update CLAUDE.md if needed
Phase 1: Quality Gate Verification
Run all quality gates:
make test # All tests pass
make lint # Zero linting errors
make type-check # Type checking passes
make fmt-check # Formatting correct
Verify coverage:
make test-cov
# Check: Modified modules >= 90%
Output: "✓ Phase 1 complete - All quality gates passed"
Phase 2: Anti-Pattern Scan
Check for anti-patterns:
-
Optional[T] - Should use
T | Nonegrep -r "Optional\[" src/ tests/ -
Missing future annotations
for f in $(find src/ -name "*.py"); do head -5 "$f" | grep -q "from __future__ import annotations" || echo "Missing: $f" done -
Type ignore without code
grep -r "# type: ignore$" src/ tests/ -
Context var cleanup missing
grep -A5 "@pytest.mark.asyncio" tests/ | grep -v "set_request_context(None)"
Fix any violations before proceeding.
Output: "✓ Phase 2 complete - No anti-patterns found"
Phase 3: Pattern Extraction
Review new patterns from implementation:
- Read
specs/active/{slug}/tmp/new-patterns.md - Identify reusable patterns
- Extract to
specs/guides/patterns/
For each new pattern:
# Pattern: {Name}
## Context
When to use this pattern.
## Implementation
```python
# Code example
Usage
How to apply this pattern.
**Output**: "✓ Phase 3 complete - Patterns extracted"
---
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 · 186 lines · 6 tokens per session scan A 653386307cf9
review is a command published in the GitHub repository JacobCoffee/debug-toolbar (7 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 6 tokens to every session and 924 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-09-04.
Other commands, from other repositories
pr
Automated PR code quality review with language-aware analysis and project-specific profiles.
code-improve
Launch autonomous code improvement loop — detects opportunities, applies improvements, creates PRs for review.
pr-enhance
Command "pr-enhance" from ruvnet/ruflo, covering pr-enhance, usage, options, examples and enhance pr.
refactor-sprint
Parallel refactor sprint — fires refactor-cleaner + code-simplifier + type-design-analyzer + tdd-guide simultaneously. Full cleanup in one pass.
quality-check-command
This command performs comprehensive code quality checks. Use it before commits or when implementation is complete.
gsd-quality
Route to the appropriate quality / review skill based on the user's intent. gsd-code-review-fix was absorbed by gsd-code-review --fix in #2790.