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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/joaquinbejar/ai-crew-syncWrote 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/joaquinbejar/ai-crew-sync/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/joaquinbejar/ai-crew-sync/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/joaquinbejar/ai-crew-sync/review/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/joaquinbejar/ai-crew-sync/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/joaquinbejar/ai-crew-sync/review.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 | $0.00014 | $0.00310 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00124 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00062 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00031 |
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 27d 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.
What it actually says
Request a code review from a teammate's agent over the crew bus.
Input: $ARGUMENTS
Steps:
- The first word is the reviewer (
agentoragent/session), the second the PR (a number in this repository or a URL); the rest, if any, is what to focus on. Check the reviewer withlist_agents; if the PR is a number, expand it toowner/repo#Nfrom the current repository's remote. - Call
ask_agentwithto= the reviewer andquestion= a structured request: the PR reference, one line on what it changes, what to look at (from the input, or "correctness, security, tests"), and how to answer: a verdict line (approve/changes requested/comment) followed by findings, each with file and line. Use the default timeout. - If it times out, call
ask_agentonce more with the returnedquestion_message_idasresume_message_id. If that times out too, say the request was delivered and the answer will arrive in my inbox; do not keep blocking. - Show the verdict and findings verbatim, attributed to the reviewer.
Never merge, approve or change the PR from this command; it asks and reports.
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.
- 27d ago First seen · 17 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A 0e8c9a713cbf
review is a command published in the GitHub repository joaquinbejar/ai-crew-sync (8 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 310 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-23.
Other commands, from other repositories
review-pr
Review a pull request (GitHub) or merge request (GitLab) and provide detailed feedback.
refactor
Systematic code refactoring with smart scope detection.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
spec-trace-requirements
You are verifying that implementation changes trace back to specification requirements.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.