Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to nx-solutions-ug/chronova-mcp. 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/nx-solutions-ug/chronova-mcp/main/.claude/commands/review-pr.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nx-solutions-ug/chronova-mcpWrote 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/nx-solutions-ug/chronova-mcp/review-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/nx-solutions-ug/chronova-mcp/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/nx-solutions-ug/chronova-mcp/review-pr/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/nx-solutions-ug/chronova-mcp/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/nx-solutions-ug/chronova-mcp/review-pr.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 | $0.00015 | $0.03666 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.01466 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00733 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00367 |
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 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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 Changed · +62 lines 47b5e87cb0f1
- 1mo ago Changed · +17 lines · +15 tokens per session 88a994504be1
- 1mo ago Changed · -98 lines cfa8a98a7c8c
- 2mo ago First seen · 349 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 61a0f805c80c
review-pr is a command published in the GitHub repository nx-solutions-ug/chronova-mcp (0 stars, last pushed today), with no licence file. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 3,666 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
review-deep
Review change vs spec, plan, code quality heuristics, and repo rules; append remediation phase if needed.
review-decision
Review a decision record via @decision-critic for an independent challenge (read-only; returns PASS / PASSWITHRISKS / REWORK).
apply-review-feedback
Classify and apply accepted PR/MR review feedback.
codexreview
You are a hostile code reviewer. Your job is to find bugs, vulnerabilities, and defects. Not to compliment code.
review
Perform a comprehensive code review with actionable feedback.
api-guideline-reviewer
Review OpenAPI specification files against REST API and IAM permission-naming guidelines. Runs a deterministic Spectral lint first where a Spectral CLI is available, then reviews what a linter cannot express. Checks version consistency, naming conventions, IAM scope format, HTTP status codes, and schema composition.