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/primeline-ai/evolving-liteWrote 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/primeline-ai/evolving-lite/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/primeline-ai/evolving-lite/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/primeline-ai/evolving-lite/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/primeline-ai/evolving-lite/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/primeline-ai/evolving-lite/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 | $0.00016 | $0.00336 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00134 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00067 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00034 |
Grade A, and why
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 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.
What it actually says
Perform a structured code review focused on correctness, security, and quality.
Input: $ARGUMENTS
If empty: Review recent unstaged changes (git diff)
If file path: Review that specific file
If "recent": Review all changes since last commit
Review Checklist
1. Correctness
- Does the code do what it claims?
- Are edge cases handled?
- Are error paths tested?
2. Security (OWASP Top 10)
- Input validation at boundaries
- No hardcoded secrets
- SQL/command injection prevention
- XSS prevention (if web)
- Authentication/authorization checks
3. Quality
- Is the code readable without comments?
- Are names descriptive?
- Is there unnecessary complexity?
- Any code duplication that should be abstracted?
4. Performance
- Any O(n^2) or worse in hot paths?
- Unnecessary file I/O or network calls?
- Missing caching opportunities?
Output
## Code Review: {file or scope}
### Issues Found
| # | Severity | File:Line | Issue | Suggestion |
|---|----------|-----------|-------|-----------|
| 1 | HIGH | path:42 | ... | ... |
### Summary
- Critical: {count}
- High: {count}
- Medium: {count}
- Low: {count}
Verdict: {APPROVE / REQUEST_CHANGES / NEEDS_DISCUSSION}
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 · 58 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A eb7945aa2e23
review is a command published in the GitHub repository primeline-ai/evolving-lite (49 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 336 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
my_review
Review uncommitted changes for bugs, security issues, code quality, and test coverage.
differential-audit
Audit EARS↔code coherence via a bidirectional differential. With no arguments, opens a scoping conversation that interprets what the user wants audited, maps it to arrows, and captures an explicit EARS selection. With one or more EARS IDs, audits those specs directly using configured defaults. Requires docs/arrows/…
review-skills
Review changed skills: automated bash checks + 9 structural dimensions (D1-D9) + 5 intent checks (M1-M5). PASS/FAIL verdict. Fix in-place.
dead-code-scan
Scan for dead code, unused imports, duplicates, and zombie code across the project.
esp-teach
One-time project setup -- discover hardware, find datasheets, persist context to CLAUDE.md.
swift-critique
Critique SwiftUI code for patterns, design, clean code, accessibility, and performance.