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/restarter/lets-workflowWrote 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/restarter/lets-workflow/check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/restarter/lets-workflow/check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/restarter/lets-workflow/check/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/restarter/lets-workflow/check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/restarter/lets-workflow/check.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 | $0.00017 | $0.08096 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.03238 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.01619 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00810 |
Grade A, and why
check 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 2d 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 — 496 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Quick Local Code Check
Fast inline sanity check from 6 perspectives. Same target selection as /lets:review - the difference is depth: /lets:check reviews inline (no subagent dispatch, no AskUserQuestion gates), /lets:review dispatches expert agents.
Usage
/lets:check # uncommitted changes (default, same as --local)
/lets:check --local # uncommitted changes (explicit)
/lets:check --staged # only staged changes
/lets:check --last-commit # last commit
/lets:check --branch # full branch vs $LETS_MERGE_BRANCH (three-dot, like a PR)
/lets:check <PR-url-or-number> # quick PR sanity (gh pr diff, inline - no agents)
/lets:check --file <path> # quick sanity of an existing file (full content, not a diff)
/lets:check --plan # quick plan sanity check
/lets:check --plan <path> # quick sanity of a specific plan file
/lets:check ... --json # structured JSON output instead of console report
/lets:check --spec <path> # use this file as the spec (or a bare task id)
/lets:check --spec none # there is deliberately no spec - no spec block, no caveat
/lets:check ... --fix # verify each finding, then apply the fixes when nothing needs deciding (not with --json)
When to Use
- Quick sanity check during development
- Before commit for significant changes
- When unsure if code is ready
- Spot check after refactoring
- Fast first pass on a PR before a full
/lets:review
For full review: Use /lets:review (same modes, multiple expert agents, deeper analysis). Every mode below has a /lets:review --<same-flag> upgrade path.
Step 0: Determine Mode
Parse the argument(s):
| Argument | Mode | Target |
|---|---|---|
--plan / --plan <path> |
Plan review | go to Plan Mode section below, skip code steps |
--file <path> |
File review | entire file content (not a diff) |
| bare PR URL or number (not a flag) | PR | gh pr diff <PR> |
--local / no argument |
Local (default) | git diff (uncommitted) |
--staged |
Local | git diff --staged |
--last-commit |
Local | git diff HEAD~1 |
--branch |
Local | three-dot merge-base diff against the base the Step 1 guard resolves (origin/{LETS_MERGE_BRANCH} when it exists) |
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.
- 2d ago Changed 4dd09cff1ad3
- 19d ago Changed · +2 lines ce7d21cb7aa1
- 23d ago Changed · +13 lines 4b3ae4157ddc
- 28d ago Changed · +12 lines 599e77751b61
- 1mo ago Changed · +4 lines 942c817ed361
- 1mo ago Changed c92e1178f551
- 1mo ago First seen · 465 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 6de93feb8452
check is a command published in the GitHub repository restarter/lets-workflow (17 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 8,096 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
audit-security
Check baseline CI security hygiene against the Starter Series bar — gitleaks, CodeQL, dep audit, license check, --ignore-scripts, Dependabot grouped, secret-scanning, claude-code-security-review, claude-security-guidance. Read-only, complementary to Anthropic's in-session security guidance plugin.
code-quality-plan-creator
LSP-powered architectural code quality analysis - works with any executor (loop or swarm).
mr-description-creator
Generate and apply MR/PR description directly via gh or glab CLI (project).
agy-review
Send the current change set to Antigravity (agy) for a senior-reviewer code review.
review
Two-stage code review (spec compliance + code quality).
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.