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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Parslee-ai/neoWrote 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/parslee-ai/neo/neo-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/parslee-ai/neo/neo-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/parslee-ai/neo/neo-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/parslee-ai/neo/neo-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/parslee-ai/neo/neo-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 | $0.00051 | $0.00412 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00206 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00082 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00041 |
Grade A, and why
neo-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
Get Neo's code review with semantic analysis.
Usage
/neo-review <file path or code description>
Description
Use this command to get Neo's code review with semantic pattern matching, security analysis, and optimization suggestions.
Examples
/neo-review src/api/handlers.py
/neo-review authentication module
/neo-review the payment processing code
What Happens
Neo will:
- Gather context from the specified file or module
- Analyze code for security vulnerabilities, edge cases, and performance issues
- Check semantic memory for similar code review patterns
- Provide improvements with confidence scores
This command uses read-only advise mode and performs no repository writes or
durable learning updates.
Presentation
Invoke with --json and follow the agent's communication protocol
(agents/neo.md). For a review specifically:
- Lead with
orchestrator.summary, then the findings themselves. - Group findings by severity, not by file. A security issue and a naming nit are not peers.
- Surface
risk_foundevents and every entry inorchestrator.cautions— a review that reads as clean because the caveats were trimmed is worse than no review. - State which assumptions Neo challenged. "Neo disagreed with the existing retry logic" is the useful half of a review.
- Give the confidence number. A 0.55 review is a starting point for your own reading, not a verdict — say so.
Parameters
<target>- File path, module name, or code description (required)
Focus areas: security, edge cases, error handling, performance
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 · 63 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A d7950e4f0633
neo-review is a command published in the GitHub repository Parslee-ai/neo (16 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 412 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
sdd-init
Initialize SDD context — detects project stack and bootstraps persistence backend.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.
argos
A command for checking whether an implementation matches its design deliverables. Its Korean description compares the work to the design as part of a completion inspection.