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/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpersWrote 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/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers/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/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers/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 | $0.00011 | $0.01500 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00750 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00300 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00150 |
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 11d 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 — 130 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Name
kubevirt:review
Synopsis
/kubevirt:review [base-branch]
Description
The kubevirt:review command performs a comprehensive code review of changes on the current local branch compared to a base branch, applying KubeVirt project coding conventions and reviewer guidelines.
If the current branch has an open pull request on GitHub, the command also evaluates PR metadata (title, description, labels, size), reads existing review discussion to avoid duplicating points, and offers to post inline review comments as a PENDING GitHub review.
This command simulates a thorough code review following the KubeVirt multi-pass review approach. Read the shared review checklist at plugins/kubevirt/skills/review/SKILL.md for the full list of review areas, conventions, and output formatting rules.
Review Passes
- General Design Pass: Verify the overall design makes sense and code structure is consistent with the project
- Detailed Code Pass: In-depth analysis of the implementation
- Standards Compliance Pass: Check adherence to KubeVirt coding conventions
- Commit History Pass: Review commit structure and messages
- PR Metadata Pass (when PR detected): Evaluate PR title, description, labels, and overall scope
Implementation
Phase 1: Gather Changes
- Determine the base branch (defaults to
main, falls back tomaster) - Run
git diff <base-branch>...HEADto get all changes on the current branch - Run
git log <base-branch>...HEADto understand commit history and structure - Prioritize files for review using the file priority order from the shared review checklist
Phase 1b: Detect Associated PR
- Check if the current branch has an open pull request:
gh pr list --head $(git branch --show-current) \ --json number,title,body,labels,state,isDraft,additions,deletions,changedFiles,comments,reviews \ --jq '.[0]' - If a PR exists:
- Record the PR number and metadata for use in later phases
- Evaluate PR metadata (title, description, labels, size, draft status) using the PR Metadata checklist from the shared skill
- Flag PRs that are too large (>500 lines changed across many files) and suggest splitting
- Fetch existing discussion:
- Use
gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<number>/commentsto read all inline review comments with file paths, line numbers, and body text - Read and understand the substance of each comment - do not just note that comments exist
- When generating the review report, do NOT duplicate points already raised in existing comments
- Note which existing comments have been addressed by subsequent commits and which remain unresolved
- Use
- If no PR exists:
- Skip PR metadata evaluation
- Note in the report that PR metadata could not be evaluated (no open PR found for this branch)
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 130 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A e1ee222e9167
review is a command published in the GitHub repository lyarwood/kubevirt-ai-helpers (2 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 1,500 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
devkit.github.review-pr
Provides comprehensive GitHub pull request review with code quality, security, and best practices analysis. Use when reviewing a PR before merging.
speckit.spex.submit
Push and create PR for team review, with optional watch mode for CI monitoring.
git
The pre-finish status: branch, hygiene findings, message checks, workflow lint, template state.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
code-review
Code review for branch changes. Analyzes git diff between branches with multi-level depth (low/medium/high). Matches changes against task description. Returns structured report with severity levels and verdict.
advanced-code-review-context
Advanced Code Review Phase 2: Context Analysis - load previous reviews, PR history, declined items.