Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add LovelaceLoom/grok-plugin-cc/plugin install grokWrote 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/lovelaceloom/grok-plugin-cc/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/lovelaceloom/grok-plugin-cc/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/lovelaceloom/grok-plugin-cc/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 5.1 | $0.00010 | $0.00614 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00307 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00123 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00061 |
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 7d 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
72% identical to review — 44 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
Run a Grok review of the local diff via the shared companion.
Raw slash-command arguments:
$ARGUMENTS
Core constraint:
- This command is review-only.
- Do not fix issues, apply patches, or suggest that you are about to make changes.
- Your only job is to run the review and return Grok's output verbatim to the user.
Execution mode rules:
- If the raw arguments include
--wait, do not ask. Run the review in the foreground. - If the raw arguments include
--background, do not ask. Run the review in a Claude background task. - Otherwise, estimate the review size before asking:
- For working-tree review, start with
git status --short --untracked-files=all. - Inspect both
git diff --shortstat --cachedandgit diff --shortstat. - For branch review, use
git diff --shortstat <base>...HEAD. - Recommend waiting only when the review is clearly tiny, roughly 1–2 files total.
- In every other case, recommend background.
- For working-tree review, start with
- Then use
AskUserQuestionexactly once with two options, putting the recommended option first and suffixing its label with(Recommended):Wait for resultsRun in background
Argument handling:
- Preserve the user's arguments exactly. Do not strip
--waitor--background. - The companion script ignores
--wait/--backgroundflags itself; Claude Code'sBash(..., run_in_background: true)is what actually detaches the run.
Foreground flow:
- Run:
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/companion.mjs" review "$ARGUMENTS"
- Return the command stdout verbatim. Do not paraphrase, summarize, or add commentary.
- Do not fix any issues mentioned in the review.
Background flow:
- Launch the review with
Bashin the background:
Bash({
command: `node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/companion.mjs" review "$ARGUMENTS"`,
description: "Grok review",
run_in_background: true
})
- Do not call
BashOutputor wait for completion in this turn. - After launching, tell the user: "Grok review started in the background. Check
/grok:statusfor progress."
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 58 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A ef834bcd9f67
review is a command published in the GitHub repository LovelaceLoom/grok-plugin-cc (5 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 614 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 72% identical to review, differing in 44 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
review
Multi-agent code review with parallel validation.
gemini-validate
Get a Gemini second opinion on a plan, diff, or claim.
open-pr
Create a pull request for the current branch following the the team's standard PR template.
apollo-review
Review the completed migration for $ARGUMENTS against the original investigation and produce a detailed report.
code-review
Review code quality applying DRY, SOLID, naming, and formatting standards.
review-pr
Review the pull request $ARGUMENTS and post inline comments using the authenticated GitHub user.