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.
npx agentmods add commands/regenrek/oplink-mcp/code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/regenrek/oplink-mcpWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.02432 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01216 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00486 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00243 |
Grade A, and why
code-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 3d 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 — 196 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
<code_review_prompt version="1.0"> <user_input> $1 </user_input>
<inputs_expected>
-
Change summary (what/why/risk): {CHANGE_SUMMARY}
-
Unified diff or patches: {DIFF}
-
Key files (new/modified/deleted): {FILES}
-
Build / test logs & coverage: {CI_LOGS} {COVERAGE_SUMMARY}
-
Runtime logs or traces (if any): {RUNTIME_LOGS}
-
Environment & deployment context: {ENVIRONMENT}
-
API schemas/contracts (OpenAPI/GraphQL/Protobuf): {API_SCHEMAS}
-
DB schema/migrations: {DB_MIGRATIONS}
-
Dependency manifests/lockfiles: {DEPENDENCIES}
-
Non-code assets (Dockerfiles, IaC, configs, feature flags): {NONCODE_ASSETS}
-
Design notes/ADRs/performance budgets/threat model: {DESIGN_DOCS} </inputs_expected>
-
Identify correctness defects, code smells, and anti-patterns.
-
Surface exploitable security issues and data-protection risks.
-
Spot performance/regression risks and complexity hotspots.
-
Check integration points (APIs, events, DB, configs, CI/CD, infra) for compatibility and rollout safety.
-
Assess tests for sufficiency, signal, reliability, and coverage.
-
Recommend minimal, safe, high-leverage improvements and monitoring.
<severity_rubric>
-
BLOCKER: Exploitable security flaw, data loss risk, broken build/deploy, user-impacting crash, irreversible migration risk, leaked secrets.
-
HIGH: Likely prod incident or major regression; authz/auth gaps; significant perf degradation; schema incompatibility.
-
MEDIUM: Correctness edge cases; non-exploitable but risky pattern; moderate perf concerns; flaky tests.
-
LOW: Maintainability, readability, style, minor test gaps; suggestions.
-
NIT: Optional polish. </severity_rubric>
-
Scope & Impact: Map all affected files/modules and why each is implicated. Note transitive and runtime impact (build, deploy, config, data).
-
Root Cause / Risk Analysis: Explain the change intent, risks introduced, and any hidden assumptions or environmental dependencies.
-
Security Review: Use the checklist below; escalate any secret exposure, injection, auth/authz flaws, SSRF/XXE/path traversal, insecure deserialization, command execution, mass assignment, CSRF/XSS, prototype pollution, weak crypto, missing TLS verification, permissive CORS, logging of secrets/PII, dependency vulns, or IaC/container misconfigurations.
-
Performance Review: Identify complexity issues, N+1 queries, unbounded loops, memory churn/leaks, blocking I/O on hot paths, missing indexes, cache misuse, chatty network calls, unnecessary allocations/boxing, and concurrency contention.
-
Integration Review: Validate API schema changes, versioning, backward/forward compatibility, idempotency, retries/timeouts/circuit breakers, feature-flag rollout, DB migrations (order/locking/rollback), message/event contracts, and config drift.
-
Testing Review: Evaluate unit/integration/e2e tests, coverage, negative/property-based cases, concurrency/time-dependent tests, fixture health, determinism, and flakiness risk. Propose a targeted test plan.
-
Observability & Operations: Check log levels, PII in logs, correlation/trace IDs, metrics and alerts, runbooks. Recommend what to monitor post-merge.
-
Documentation & DX: Flag missing or outdated README/CHANGELOG/ADRs/API docs/config comments/schema diagrams. Note onboarding and maintenance friction.
-
Minimal, Safe Fix: Propose the smallest viable change to eliminate blockers/high risks. Include tests and rollout/rollback steps.
<detailed_checklist>
-
Duplicate code / long methods / large classes / deep nesting.
-
Leaky abstractions, tight coupling, poor cohesion, improper layering.
-
Dead code, unused variables/imports, TODOs that should be addressed now.
-
Non-idempotent operations where idempotency is required.
-
Edge cases: null/empty/NaN/overflow/encoding/timezone/locale.
-
Concurrency: shared state, race conditions, improper locking, async misuse.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 196 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A dcf10ed13eb7
code-review is a command published in the GitHub repository regenrek/oplink-mcp (10 stars, last pushed 9mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,432 tokens. 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
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.