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/liortesta/ClawdAgentWrote 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/liortesta/clawdagent/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/liortesta/clawdagent/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/liortesta/clawdagent/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/liortesta/clawdagent/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/liortesta/clawdagent/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 | $0.00269 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00108 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00054 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00027 |
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.
What it actually says
Comprehensive Code Review
Run a 3-agent review on the current changes.
Process:
- First, run
git diffto identify all changed files - Spawn 3 subagents IN PARALLEL:
- code-reviewer agent: Review for quality, readability, maintainability, and best practices
- security-auditor agent: Scan for vulnerabilities, OWASP Top 10, secrets exposure
- qa-engineer agent: Verify test coverage, suggest missing tests, check edge cases
- Collect all findings from the 3 agents
- Synthesize into a single prioritized report
Output Format:
## Review Summary
**Verdict**: [APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES / NEEDS DISCUSSION]
### Critical Issues (must fix before merge)
- [issue with file:line reference]
### Security Concerns
- [finding with severity]
### Test Coverage
- [coverage assessment]
- [missing tests]
### Suggestions (non-blocking)
- [improvement ideas]
### Highlights (things done well)
- [positive feedback]
Rules:
- NEVER approve code with critical security issues
- ALWAYS provide specific file:line references
- ALWAYS suggest the fix, not just the problem
$ARGUMENTS
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 42 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 5a693aca1e72
review is a command published in the GitHub repository liortesta/ClawdAgent (11 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 269 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
refactor
Systematic code refactoring with smart scope detection.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
spec-trace-requirements
You are verifying that implementation changes trace back to specification requirements.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
boot
Start a new PromptKit prompt assembly session (alias for /bootstrap).