Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to luiseiman/dotforge. 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/luiseiman/dotforge/main/.claude/commands/review.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/luiseiman/dotforgeWrote 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/luiseiman/dotforge/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/luiseiman/dotforge/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/luiseiman/dotforge/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/luiseiman/dotforge/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/luiseiman/dotforge/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 | $0.00273 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00109 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00055 |
| 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
Code Review
Ejecutá un code review como senior engineer para producción.
Argumentos
$ARGUMENTS: archivos o directorio a revisar. Si está vacío, revisar archivos modificados (git diff --name-only).
Proceso
-
Identificar archivos a revisar:
- Si se proporcionaron archivos específicos, usar esos
- Si no,
git diff --name-onlypara archivos modificados - Si no hay diff, preguntar qué revisar
-
Evaluar en este orden de prioridad:
Bugs y casos edge (crítico)
- Null/undefined no manejados
- Off-by-one errors
- Race conditions en async
- Inputs no validados
Seguridad (crítico)
- SQL injection, XSS, secrets hardcodeados, permisos excesivos
Performance (si hay problema real)
- N+1 queries, loops innecesarios, memory leaks
Legibilidad y mantenibilidad
- Nombres descriptivos, funciones <50 líneas, single responsibility
- Para cada problema:
🔴|🟡|🟢 [ÁREA] archivo:línea
Issue: qué está mal
Impacto: qué puede pasar
Fix: cómo corregirlo
- Al final, código corregido completo de los archivos con problemas.
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 · 41 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 85ec87494f87
review is a command published in the GitHub repository luiseiman/dotforge (8 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 273 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
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.
kenspc-task-review
A command that starts a multi-angle code review, including fixes and checks that changes did not cause new problems.
assemble-team
Assemble a pre-built agent team for parallel work - review, feature, debug, cross-platform, full-stack, or research.
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.
double-check
Comprehensive verification with automated quality gates, confession gathering, and confidence-based issue filtering. Default: self-review with gates. --deep: multi-agent review via code-reviewer agent. Use before committing, after fixing bugs, or to validate feature completeness.
create-pr
Context-aware GitHub Pull Request creation and update assistant.