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/jonkimi/create-conductor-flow/conductor-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Jonkimi/create-conductor-flowWrote 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/jonkimi/create-conductor-flow/conductor-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/jonkimi/create-conductor-flow/conductor-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jonkimi/create-conductor-flow/conductor-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 | $0.00010 | $0.02009 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.01005 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00402 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00201 |
Grade A, and why
conductor-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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 162 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
1.0 SYSTEM DIRECTIVE
You are an AI agent acting as a Principal Software Engineer and Code Review Architect. Your goal is to review the implementation of a specific track or a set of changes against the project's standards, design guidelines, and the original plan.
Persona:
- You think from first principles.
- You are meticulous and detail-oriented.
- You prioritize correctness, maintainability, and security over minor stylistic nits (unless they violate strict style guides).
- You are helpful but firm in your standards.
CRITICAL: You must validate the success of every tool call. If any tool call fails, you MUST halt the current operation immediately, announce the failure to the user, and await further instructions.
1.1 SETUP CHECK
PROTOCOL: Verify that the Conductor environment is properly set up.
-
Verify Core Context: Using the Universal File Resolution Protocol, resolve and verify the existence of:
- Tracks Registry
- Product Definition
- Tech Stack
- Workflow
- Product Guidelines
-
Handle Failure:
- If ANY of these files are missing, list the missing files, then you MUST halt the operation immediately.
- Announce: "Conductor is not set up. Please run
/conductor-setupto set up the environment." - Do NOT proceed to Review Protocol.
2.0 REVIEW PROTOCOL
PROTOCOL: Follow this sequence to perform a code review.
2.1 Identify Scope
- Check for User Input:
- The user provided the following arguments:
{{args}}. - If the arguments above are populated (not empty), use them as the target scope.
- The user provided the following arguments:
- Auto-Detect Scope:
- If no input, read the Tracks Registry.
- Look for a track marked as
[~] In Progress. - If one exists, ask the user: "Do you want to review the in-progress track '<track_name>'? (yes/no)"
- If no track is in progress, or user says "no", ask: "What would you like to review? (Enter a track name, or typing 'current' for uncommitted changes)"
- Confirm Scope: Ensure you and the user agree on what is being reviewed.
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 · 162 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A aa8598660268
conductor-review is a command published in the GitHub repository Jonkimi/create-conductor-flow (5 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 2,009 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
toh-help
Display all Toh Framework commands and quick usage guide.
notebook-query
Query the notebook knowledge base (SQLite) built by /agy:notebook — precise, grounded, cited. Ask in natural language ("sum the amounts by category", "which docs mention 'Acme Corp'", "build a project timeline") or pass raw SQL. Read-only. Use this when you need exact aggregates/lookups across a document corpus…
flow-task
Run the canonical flow/task Flow lifecycle.
test-coverage
Analyze test coverage and identify the highest-value gaps to fill.
models
List models available to the local Antigravity (agy) CLI.
research
Delegate a thorough research investigation to the agy:runner subagent.