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/lalitnayyar/finallyWrote 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/lalitnayyar/finally/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/lalitnayyar/finally/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/lalitnayyar/finally/code-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/lalitnayyar/finally/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/lalitnayyar/finally/code-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 | $0.00023 | $0.00614 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00246 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00123 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00061 |
Grade A, and why
gsd:code-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 13d 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to gsd:code-review — 4 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Spawns the gsd-code-reviewer agent to analyze code at the specified depth level. Produces REVIEW.md artifact in the phase directory with severity-classified findings.
Arguments:
- Phase number (required) — which phase's changes to review (e.g., "2" or "02")
--depth=quick|standard|deep(optional) — review depth level, overrides workflow.code_review_depth config- quick: Pattern-matching only (~2 min)
- standard: Per-file analysis with language-specific checks (~5-15 min, default)
- deep: Cross-file analysis including import graphs and call chains (~15-30 min)
--files file1,file2,...(optional) — explicit comma-separated file list, skips SUMMARY/git scoping (highest precedence for scoping)
Output: {padded_phase}-REVIEW.md in phase directory + inline summary of findings
<execution_context> @/home/lnayyar/projects/CourseAIVibeCodeUdmey/finally/.claude/get-shit-done/workflows/code-review.md </execution_context>
Optional flags parsed from $ARGUMENTS:
--depth=VALUE— Depth override (quick|standard|deep). If provided, overrides workflow.code_review_depth config.--files=file1,file2,...— Explicit file list override. Has highest precedence for file scoping per D-08. When provided, workflow skips SUMMARY.md extraction and git diff fallback entirely.
Context files (CLAUDE.md, SUMMARY.md, phase state) are resolved inside the workflow via gsd-tools init phase-op and delegated to agent via <files_to_read> blocks.
Execute the code-review workflow from @/home/lnayyar/projects/CourseAIVibeCodeUdmey/finally/.claude/get-shit-done/workflows/code-review.md end-to-end.
The workflow (not this command) enforces these gates:
- Phase validation (before config gate)
- Config gate check (workflow.code_review)
- File scoping (--files override > SUMMARY.md > git diff fallback)
- Empty scope check (skip if no files)
- Agent spawning (gsd-code-reviewer)
- Result presentation (inline summary + next steps)
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.
- 13d ago First seen · 56 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 4df4015514ff
gsd:code-review is a command published in the GitHub repository lalitnayyar/finally (0 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 614 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to gsd:code-review, differing in 4 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
refactor
Systematic code refactoring with smart scope detection.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
boot
Start a new PromptKit prompt assembly session (alias for /bootstrap).
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.