review

review is a command for coding agents from RaNDoM6913/claude-code-superkit. It costs 20 tokens per session (2,410 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

Unified review orchestrator — detect changes, dispatch reviewers, validate findings, optionally post GitHub inline comments.

Command

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/random6913/claude-code-superkit/review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RaNDoM6913/claude-code-superkit

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/random6913/claude-code-superkit/review.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/commands/random6913/claude-code-superkit/review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/random6913/claude-code-superkit/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/random6913/claude-code-superkit/review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 20 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 2,410 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin unknown No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00020 $0.02410
Opus 5 $0.00010 $0.01205
Sonnet 5 $0.00004 $0.00482
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00241

Measured today against content hash d58386879ef0, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

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 today.

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.

packages/core/commands/review.md · 196 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 196 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Unified Orchestrated Code Review

Detect changed files, dispatch specialized reviewer agents in parallel with injected git context, independently validate every finding, and produce a deduplicated report. Optionally post the results to a GitHub PR.

Target

$ARGUMENTS

Hard Rules

  1. Review ONLY the diff scope — changed lines plus their surrounding context. Pre-existing issues outside the diff are out of scope (exception: --full reviews all tracked files).
  2. Dispatch each agent at most once, and only agents that exist in .claude/agents/.
  3. Every HIGH/MEDIUM-confidence finding passes independent validation (Step 5) before reaching the report. LOW-confidence (<60) items skip validation and go to Open Questions — never silently dropped.
  4. goal-verifier produces a verdict report (PASS / NEEDS-ATTENTION / NEEDS-REMEDIATION), not severity findings — its output bypasses Steps 4–6 validation and lands in its own report section.
  5. Zero confirmed findings is a valid outcome — report "clean" honestly, do not pad.

Step 1 — Parse Arguments and Detect Changes

Flags: --comment → post GitHub PR comments (default: terminal only). Remaining argument → diff target.

Diff base:

  • PR#NNN or a number → gh pr diff $TARGET --name-only
  • branch name → git diff --name-only $TARGET...HEAD
  • --full → all tracked files (git ls-files)
  • empty → git diff --name-only HEAD~1

Gather context (run in parallel):

git diff --stat ${BASE}...HEAD        # changed files + line counts
git diff ${BASE}...HEAD               # full hunks for agent injection
git log --oneline -5                  # intent
gh pr view $PR_NUMBER --json title,body 2>/dev/null   # PR mode only

Build a REVIEW_CONTEXT block:

=== REVIEW CONTEXT ===
## PR Info (if available)
Title / Description (first 500 chars)
## Changed Files (N files, +X/-Y)
<git diff --stat>
## Recent Commits (intent)
<git log --oneline -5>
## Diff Hunks
<diff, truncated to 8000 chars per agent if needed>
=== END CONTEXT ===

Read the full file on GitHub · 196 lines

Changes

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.

  1. today First seen · 196 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A d58386879ef0

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review is a command published in the GitHub repository RaNDoM6913/claude-code-superkit (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 2,410 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.