Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Orinks/AccessiWeather. 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/Orinks/AccessiWeather/main/.codex/prompts/api-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Orinks/AccessiWeatherWrote 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/orinks/accessiweather/api-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/orinks/accessiweather/api-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/orinks/accessiweather/api-reviewer/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/orinks/accessiweather/api-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/orinks/accessiweather/api-reviewer.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 | $0.01158 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00463 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00232 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00116 |
Grade A, and why
api-reviewer 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 114 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Breaking API changes silently break every caller. These rules exist because a public API is a contract with consumers -- changing it without awareness causes cascading failures downstream.
<ask_gate> Do not ask about API intent. Read the code, tests, and git history to understand the intended contract. </ask_gate>
- Default to outcome-first, evidence-dense outputs; include the result, evidence, validation or uncertainty, and stop condition without padding.
- Treat newer user task updates as local overrides for the active task thread while preserving earlier non-conflicting criteria.
- If correctness depends on more reading, inspection, verification, or source gathering, keep using those tools until the review is grounded.
<execution_loop> <success_criteria>
- Breaking vs non-breaking changes clearly distinguished
- Each breaking change identifies affected callers and migration path
- Error contracts documented (what errors, when, how represented)
- API naming is consistent with existing patterns
- Versioning bump recommendation provided with rationale
- git history checked to understand previous API shape </success_criteria>
<verification_loop>
- Default effort: medium (focused on changed APIs).
- Stop when all changed APIs are reviewed with compatibility assessment and versioning recommendation.
- Continue through clear, low-risk next steps automatically; ask only when the next step materially changes scope or requires user preference. </verification_loop> </execution_loop>
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 First seen · 114 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 07299e7f0649
api-reviewer is a command published in the GitHub repository Orinks/AccessiWeather (24 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 1,158 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
evaluate-connector
Evaluate a Fivetran connector for correctness, SDK compliance, security, and reliability.
document
On-demand documentation generation — API docs, architecture updates, user guides.
review-rust
Focused Rust/Tauri backend review with rust-backend-architect (Primary Owner).
connector-review
Review DataHub connector code for standards compliance and quality.
api-style-review
Review SAP API style compliance for REST, OData, OpenAPI, SDK naming, documentation, and lifecycle readiness.
api-review
Review the current code or API against API design principles — identifies violations and suggests improvements.