Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to KbWen/agentic-os. 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/KbWen/agentic-os/main/.claude/commands/review.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/KbWen/agentic-osWrote 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/kbwen/agentic-os/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/kbwen/agentic-os/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/kbwen/agentic-os/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/kbwen/agentic-os/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/kbwen/agentic-os/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 | $0.00000 | $0.00101 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00040 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00020 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00010 |
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 1mo 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
What it actually says
/review
Execute the canonical workflow: .agent/workflows/review.md
Required reads before execution
.agent/rules/security_guardrails.md— auto-enforced during review- Active Work Log — must contain implementation evidence
Execution
Follow every step in .agent/workflows/review.md sequentially.
Focus on regressions, compatibility risks, scope creep, and security findings.
List findings by severity with file references.
End response with ⚡ ACX.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 16 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A faecafdac3af
review is a command published in the GitHub repository KbWen/agentic-os (220 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 101 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
cross-review
../../workflows/cross-review.md.
conformance
Assess architecture conformance — ADR decision implementation, cross-decision consistency, design-principles alignment, architecture drift, technical debt, and custom constraint rules.
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.
gh-security-review
Use to perform a dedicated security review of current branch changes before pushing.
resolve-dependabot-prs
Triage open Dependabot PRs, return a quick risk/action summary table, then enter planning mode with an ordered rebase→merge→follow-up→resume resolution plan.
review-code
Call getworkflowcommandguidance(kind="design-plan", focus="Architecture focus: inspect saved scripts against their current step objectives, input/output contracts, and relevant retained behavior. Propose improvements without applying them.