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.
npx agentmods add commands/modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk/review-prgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/python-sdkWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.00908 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00454 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00182 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00091 |
Grade A, and why
review-pr 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 yesterday.
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 — 119 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review the pull request: $ARGUMENTS
Follow these steps carefully. Use the gh CLI for all GitHub interactions.
Step 1: Resolve the PR
Parse $ARGUMENTS to determine the PR. It can be:
- A full URL like
https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/123 - A
owner/repo#123reference - A bare number like
123(use the current repo) - A description — search for it with
gh pr list --search "<description>" --limit 5and pick the best match
Once resolved, fetch the PR metadata:
gh pr view <PR> --json number,title,body,author,state,baseRefName,headRefName,url,labels,milestone,additions,deletions,changedFiles,createdAt,updatedAt,mergedAt,reviewDecision,reviews,assignees
Step 2: Gather the diff
Get the full diff of the PR:
gh pr diff <PR>
If the diff is very large (>3000 lines), focus on the most important files first and summarize the rest.
Step 3: Collect PR discussion context
Fetch all comments and review threads:
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/comments --paginate
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{number}/comments --paginate
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/reviews --paginate
Pay attention to:
- Reviewer feedback and requested changes
- Author responses and explanations
- Any unresolved conversations
- Approval or rejection status
Step 4: Find and read linked issues
Look for issue references in:
- The PR body (patterns like
#123,fixes #123,closes #123,resolves #123) - The PR branch name (patterns like
issue-123,fix/123) - Commit messages
For each linked issue, fetch its content:
gh issue view <number> --json title,body,comments,labels,state
Read through issue comments to understand the original problem, user reports, and any discussed solutions.
Step 5: Analyze and validate
With all context gathered, analyze the PR critically:
- Intent alignment: Does the code change actually solve the problem described in the PR and/or linked issues?
- Completeness: Are there aspects of the issue or requested feature that the PR doesn't address?
- Scope: Does the PR include changes unrelated to the stated goal? Are there unnecessary modifications?
- Correctness: Based on the diff, are there obvious bugs, edge cases, or logic errors?
- Testing: Does the PR include tests? Are they meaningful and do they cover the important cases?
- Breaking changes: Could this PR break existing functionality or APIs?
- Unresolved feedback: Are there reviewer comments that haven't been addressed?
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.
- yesterday First seen · 119 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 2203ee8d472b
review-pr is a command published in the GitHub repository modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk (24,160 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 908 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
validate
Pre-handoff validation checklist. Run this before declaring a task complete.
run-tests
Load the /run-tests skill, then run the full Embody test suite via MCP.
explore-network
Explore the current TouchDesigner network and report its structure.
status
Perform a quick health check of the Embody project.
pr-address
Address PR review comments on current branch.
enforce_standards
CRITICAL: Before running the code standards enforcer, we must prepare the stack properly and abort if there are merge conflicts.