Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to mylee04/who-ran-what. 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/mylee04/who-ran-what/main/.claude/commands/review.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mylee04/who-ran-whatWrote 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/mylee04/who-ran-what/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/mylee04/who-ran-what/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/mylee04/who-ran-what/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/mylee04/who-ran-what/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/mylee04/who-ran-what/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 | $0.00008 | $0.00296 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00148 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00059 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00030 |
Grade A, and why
review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 11d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
Code Review
Execute these steps NOW:
Step 1: Identify changed files
git diff --name-only HEAD~1 | grep -E '\.(sh|bash)$' || git diff --name-only HEAD~1
Step 2: For each changed file, check:
Security (BLOCK if found)
- No hardcoded credentials or API keys
- No
evalon user input - No command injection vulnerabilities
Shell Best Practices (NEEDS CHANGES if found)
- All variables quoted:
"$var" - Functions use
localfor variables - Uses
[[ ]]not[ ] - Uses
command -vnotwhich
Code Quality
- Functions are small and focused
- Variable names are clear
- No dead code
Step 3: Output format
## Code Review: [filename]
### Security: ✅ PASS / ❌ ISSUES
[list any issues]
### Best Practices: ✅ PASS / ⚠️ WARNINGS
[list any issues with line numbers]
### Verdict: APPROVE / NEEDS CHANGES / BLOCK
Step 4: Run shellcheck
shellcheck -x -e SC1091 [changed files]
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 · 52 lines · 8 tokens per session scan A 6553b1c5f85a
review is a command published in the GitHub repository mylee04/who-ran-what (3 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 8 tokens to every session and 296 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
atomic-plan
Write a design doc (concepts, business rules, approaches) and a checkpoint-table spec (contract) for non-trivial work; inline spec only for trivial. Gauges triviality; loops spec authoring with subagents. Human-facing artifact, Mermaid diagrams allowed.
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.
session-report
Capture what changed this session and why, scoped to the current branch. Read by ship verbs when synthesizing the commit message; deleted after a successful commit.
next
Suggest the most likely next workflow action based on current context.
afo
Open feature worktree in terminal and start agent (shortcut for feature-open).
advanced-code-review-context
Advanced Code Review Phase 2: Context Analysis - load previous reviews, PR history, declined items.