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/joris887/exosuitWrote 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/joris887/exosuit/review-pr-ci)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/joris887/exosuit/review-pr-ci"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/joris887/exosuit/review-pr-ci/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/joris887/exosuit/review-pr-ci"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/joris887/exosuit/review-pr-ci.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 | $0.00460 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00230 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00092 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00046 |
Grade A, and why
review-pr-ci 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 9d 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
CI PR Review
Non-interactive PR review for CI/CD context. Read-only analysis — no edits.
Process
-
Discover PR scope:
git diff --stat main...HEAD git diff --name-only main...HEAD git log main..HEAD --oneline -
Code quality analysis:
- Check cyclomatic complexity of changed functions (flag >10)
- Identify duplicated code blocks (>10 lines)
- Verify pattern consistency with existing codebase
- Check error handling in new code paths
-
Test validation:
- Verify test files exist for new source files
- Check for weakened assertions (toBeTruthy replacing specific checks)
- Check for deleted or skipped tests
- Verify assertion density (≥1.5 per test)
-
Security scan:
- Scan changed files for hardcoded secret patterns
- Check imported packages exist in dependency files
- Verify input validation on user-facing code
- Check CWE top 10 patterns (injection, XSS, path traversal)
-
Post structured review as PR comment:
## Claude Code Review
### Summary
[1-3 sentences on overall quality]
### Findings
| Severity | File | Line | Issue | Confidence |
|----------|------|------|-------|------------|
| [HIGH/MED/LOW] | [path] | [line] | [description] | [0-100] |
### Test Coverage
- New files with tests: [X/Y]
- Assertion density: [X.X]
- Degradation detected: [yes/no]
### Security
- Secret patterns: [PASS/findings]
- Dependency check: [PASS/findings]
- Input validation: [PASS/findings]
### Verdict: [APPROVE / REQUEST_CHANGES / COMMENT]
[One-line rationale]
Only report findings with confidence ≥80 as actionable. Lower confidence goes in a Notes section.
Rules
- NEVER edit files or create commits
- NEVER approve PRs that fail security checks (≥80 confidence)
- ALWAYS provide file:line references for findings
- ALWAYS run fresh analysis — never use cached results
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 67 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A ab4c774cf981
review-pr-ci is a command published in the GitHub repository joris887/exosuit (4 stars, last pushed 20d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 460 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.
Other commands, from other repositories
audit-agents-skills
Audit quality of agents, skills, and commands in a Claude Code project.
review
Command "review" from owainlewis/youtube-tutorials, covering review, target, instructions, simplicity and clarity.
review
Run a code review on changed files (or a path you pass).
pr-review
Revisión automatizada de Pull Requests con análisis de coverage, seguridad y conformidad con specs. Usa cuando el usuario dice "revisar PR", "PR review", "pull request review", "review this PR", "analizar PR", "GitHub PR", "merge request", "code review PR", "checar PR antes de merge". Analiza coverage diff, security…
revisar
Peer review estricto de código con análisis de rendimiento, arquitectura, seguridad y cumplimiento. Usa cuando el usuario dice "revisar código", "code review", "peer review", "revisame este archivo", "review my code", "analizar código", "revisar PR", "revisar feature". Incluye análisis de performance, security OWASP…
tech-debt
Detectar y cuantificar deuda técnica con clasificación. Usa cuando el usuario dice "deuda técnica", "technical debt", "code smells", "refactorizar", "tech debt", "code rot", "spaghetti code", "duplicación", "complejidad ciclomática", "mantenibilidad". Incluye clasificación especial para AI slop. Genera reporte con…