Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to plipowczan/claude-piv-skeleton. 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/plipowczan/claude-piv-skeleton/main/.claude/commands/validation/code-review-fix.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/plipowczan/claude-piv-skeletonWrote 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/plipowczan/claude-piv-skeleton/code-review-fix)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/plipowczan/claude-piv-skeleton/code-review-fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/plipowczan/claude-piv-skeleton/code-review-fix.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00006 | $0.01526 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00763 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00001 | $0.00305 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00153 |
Grade A, and why
code-review-fix 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 7d 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 — 271 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review Fix: Implement Review Recommendations
Code Review Report
Read code review report: $ARGUMENTS
Example: .claude/agents/code-reviews/example-feature-validation-review.md
Process
1. Read and Understand Review
Read the code review report completely:
- Identify all issues found
- Understand severity levels (critical, high, medium, low)
- Review suggested fixes
- Note code examples provided
2. Prioritize Fixes
Fix in this order:
Priority 1: Critical Issues
- Security vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, exposed secrets)
- Data loss risks
- Race conditions
- Must fix before commit
Priority 2: High Priority Issues
- Performance problems (N+1 queries, memory leaks)
- Logic errors
- Code quality issues that affect functionality
- Should fix before commit
Priority 3: Medium Priority Issues
- Code quality improvements
- Minor performance optimizations
- Can fix in follow-up if needed
Priority 4: Low Priority Issues
- Style issues (use linting tools)
- Nice-to-have improvements
- Can defer
3. Fix Each Issue
For each issue in the review report:
Step 1: Locate the code
- Find the file and line number
- Read surrounding context
- Understand the issue
Step 2: Apply the fix
- Follow the suggestion from the review
- Use the code example provided
- Follow Example patterns (see reference docs)
Step 3: Verify the fix
- Run related tests
- Check for new issues introduced
- Ensure the fix doesn't break other functionality
Step 4: Document the fix
- Add comment if logic is complex
- Update related documentation if needed
4. Example Standards Compliance
When fixing issues, ensure compliance with:
Spring Data JDBC (NOT JPA/Hibernate):
// ✅ GOOD: Simple entity for JDBC
public class Entity {
private Long id;
private Long userId;
}
// ❌ BAD: JPA annotations
@Entity
public class Entity {
@ManyToOne
private User user;
}
Constructor Injection:
// ✅ GOOD: Constructor injection
@RequiredArgsConstructor
public class Service {
private final Repository repository;
}
// ❌ BAD: Field injection
@Autowired
private Repository repository;
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 271 lines · 6 tokens per session scan A a69500ccb636
code-review-fix is a command published in the GitHub repository plipowczan/claude-piv-skeleton (4 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 6 tokens to every session and 1,526 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
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.
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.
security-review
AI-powered security review of the current git diff (or specified paths). Dispatches the security-reviewer agent and prints findings grouped by severity.