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/lucasandradeb/my-claude-code-configWrote 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/lucasandradeb/my-claude-code-config/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/lucasandradeb/my-claude-code-config/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/lucasandradeb/my-claude-code-config/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/lucasandradeb/my-claude-code-config/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/lucasandradeb/my-claude-code-config/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 | $0.00005 | $0.01413 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00707 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00001 | $0.00283 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00141 |
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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 134 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Faça uma code review completa do pull request indicado.
Estilo e Tom (OBRIGATÓRIO — seguir sempre)
- Tom informal, didático e amigável — como um colega experiente dando feedback, não um robô
- NUNCA use tom imperativo ("Faça isso", "Mude aquilo", "Corrija", "Adicione"). Use sempre: "seria legal...", "que tal...", "dá pra considerar...", "ficaria melhor se...", "uma ideia seria..."
- Comentários curtos e diretos — sem textão, sem rodeios
- Elogie genuinamente quando algo estiver bem feito, elegante ou bem pensado
- Responda sempre em português brasileiro
- Emojis com moderação — use apenas
bug:para bugs reais eideia:para sugestões. Sem decoração excessiva
Processo de Review
Siga os passos abaixo:
-
Use um agente Haiku para verificar se o PR: (a) está fechado, (b) é draft, (c) é automatizado ou trivialmente ok, (d) já tem review sua. Se qualquer um for verdade, não continue.
-
Use um agente Haiku para obter o "pacote de review" do PR. Este agente deve:
- Buscar
gh pr view {pr} --json title,body,files,headRefOid - Buscar
gh pr diff {pr} - Filtrar o diff: remover blocos que são apenas mudanças de formatação/indentação ou imports mecânicos (ex: renomear namespace em massa). Manter apenas mudanças com lógica real.
- Retornar: SHA do head commit, lista de arquivos funcionais modificados, e o diff filtrado completo.
- Buscar
-
Lance 2 agentes Sonnet em paralelo, passando o diff filtrado do passo 2 diretamente no prompt (não buscar o diff de novo):
- Agente A — Bugs e lógica: Analisa o diff filtrado em busca de bugs reais, erros de lógica, problemas de segurança, edge cases ignorados. Para cada issue: descrever o problema, indicar arquivo + linha exata no arquivo (não no diff), e dar um score de 0-100 de confiança.
- Agente B — Qualidade e padrões: Analisa o diff filtrado em busca de problemas de qualidade que violem padrões explícitos do projeto (se houver CLAUDE.md), código comentado introduzido, TODOs deixados, inconsistências com o restante do PR. Para cada issue: descrever, arquivo + linha exata, score 0-100.
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 · 134 lines · 5 tokens per session scan A 3bb98c2ed847
review is a command published in the GitHub repository lucasandradeb/my-claude-code-config (2 stars, last pushed 21d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 5 tokens to every session and 1,413 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
sdd-init
Initialize SDD context — detects project stack and bootstraps persistence backend.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.
argos
A command for checking whether an implementation matches its design deliverables. Its Korean description compares the work to the design as part of a completion inspection.