Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Prof-Harita/terminaI. 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/Prof-Harita/terminaI/main/.gemini/commands/oncall/pr-review.tomlgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Prof-Harita/terminaIWrote 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/prof-harita/terminai/pr-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/prof-harita/terminai/pr-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/prof-harita/terminai/pr-review.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00736 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00368 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00147 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00074 |
Grade A, and why
pr-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 4d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to pr-review — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 48 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
description = "Review a specific pull request"
prompt = """
Mission: Comprehensive Pull Request Review
Today, our mission is to meticulously review community pull requests (PRs) for this project. We will proceed systematically, evaluating each candidate PR for its quality, adherence to standards, and readiness for merging.
Workflow:
-
PR Preparation & Initial Assessment:
- You will check out the designated PR {{args}} into a temporary branch.
- Execute the preflight checks (
npm run preflight). This includes building, linting, and running all unit tests. - Analyze the output of these preflight checks, noting any failures, warnings, or linting issues.
-
In-Depth Code Review:
- Your primary role is to conduct a thorough and in-depth code review of the changes introduced in the PR. Focus your analysis on the following criteria:
- Correctness: Does the code achieve its stated purpose without bugs or logical errors?
- Maintainability: Is the code clean, well-structured, and easy to understand and modify in the future? Consider factors like code clarity, modularity, and adherence to established design patterns.
- Readability: Is the code well-commented (where necessary) and consistently formatted according to our project's coding style guidelines?
- Efficiency: Are there any obvious performance bottlenecks or resource inefficiencies introduced by the changes?
- Security: Are there any potential security vulnerabilities or insecure coding practices?
- Edge Cases and Error Handling: Does the code appropriately handle edge cases and potential errors?
- Testability: Is the new or modified code adequately covered by tests (even if preflight checks pass)? Suggest additional test cases that would improve coverage or robustness.
- Based on your analysis, you will determine if the PR is safe to merge.
- Your primary role is to conduct a thorough and in-depth code review of the changes introduced in the PR. Focus your analysis on the following criteria:
-
Reviewing Previous Feedback:
- Access and examine the PR's history to identify any outstanding requests or unresolved comments from previous reviews. Incorporate these into your current review and explicitly highlight if they have been adequately addressed in the current state of the PR.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 48 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A c90e5d521621
pr-review is a command published in the GitHub repository Prof-Harita/terminaI (424 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 736 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to pr-review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
pr
Automated PR code quality review with language-aware analysis and project-specific profiles.
refactor-sprint
Parallel refactor sprint — fires refactor-cleaner + code-simplifier + type-design-analyzer + tdd-guide simultaneously. Full cleanup in one pass.
quality-check-command
This command performs comprehensive code quality checks. Use it before commits or when implementation is complete.
gsd-quality
Route to the appropriate quality / review skill based on the user's intent. gsd-code-review-fix was absorbed by gsd-code-review --fix in #2790.
p5-impl-refactor
Improves code quality without changing behavior. All tests must continue to pass.
p5-review-code
Checks code for quality, clean code, logic errors and test coverage. Delivers review findings with severity level.