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/nicobailon/visual-explainer/diff-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nicobailon/visual-explainerWhat 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 | $0.00011 | $0.00539 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00269 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00108 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00054 |
Grade A, and why
diff-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 2d 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 — 44 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Load the visual-explainer skill and generate a self-contained HTML diff review.
Quick mode
Only use quick mode when $@ contains the literal --quick flag. Remove the flag before scope detection. Complete the same evidence gathering and verification below, then read ./quick/README.md and ./quick/schema.json and express the review as a compact spec. In Pi, call visual_explainer with action: "render_quick". In other harnesses, run the local ./quick/render.mjs fallback. If the review does not fit the schema, validation fails, or rendering errors, generate complete HTML and use the normal render flow. Without --quick, preserve full HTML behavior.
Scope detection
Interpret $@ as a branch, commit, range, PR, or HEAD. If no argument is given, compare the working tree against main/master.
Data gathering before HTML
Run the relevant git commands for: diff stats, name-status, changed files, line counts, public API/type/function changes, added/removed files, docs/changelog changes, tests touched, dependencies/config changes. Read changed files in full plus surrounding code paths needed to validate behavior. If reviewing committed work, read commit messages. If this session created the work, use available progress/plan notes for rationale.
Source verification
Before generating, know and cite:
- exact changed files and line-count scope;
- each function/type/module name referenced;
- before/after behavior for important changes;
- likely coupling and test impact.
Use file paths, command outputs, or file:line evidence. Do not invent rationale or code paths.
Required page sections
- Executive summary: intuition, problem solved, factual scope.
- File map: full tree, color-coded new/modified/deleted; compact,
<details>if long. - Architecture impact: Mermaid or hybrid diagram when relationships matter.
- Before/after behavior: side-by-side visual comparison.
- Risk review: correctness, tests, API compatibility, security/privacy, performance, maintainability.
- Coupling map: dependencies, hidden coupling, migration/release concerns.
- Review recommendation: merge/readiness, blockers, follow-ups.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 44 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 9ccca7c6e9de
diff-review is a command published in the GitHub repository nicobailon/visual-explainer (9,604 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 539 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.