Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to ribeirogab/zeno-agent. 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/ribeirogab/zeno-agent/main/.agents/commands/new-pr.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ribeirogab/zeno-agentWrote 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/ribeirogab/zeno-agent/new-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/ribeirogab/zeno-agent/new-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ribeirogab/zeno-agent/new-pr/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/ribeirogab/zeno-agent/new-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ribeirogab/zeno-agent/new-pr.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 | $0.00000 | $0.01154 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00462 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00231 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00115 |
Grade A, and why
new-pr 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
New PR
Draft and open a pull request against this repo, following the project's PR template, sanitization rule, and release flow.
When to invoke
The user (or another agent) types /new-pr from Claude Code. Optional argument: a one-line PR title or summary hint.
Steps
-
Branch check. Run
git branch --show-current. Refuse to proceed if onmain(the project's flow is "branch → PR → squash-merge into main"; opening a PR from main into main is incoherent). If on a feature branch, continue. -
Quality gate. Run:
pnpm run quality-gateAbort with the gate's error output if it fails. The user's job is to fix the issue and re-invoke
/new-pr. -
Sanitization heuristic check. Diff the branch against
mainand grep for known leak patterns (the maintainer's known real identifiers, common employer slugs, real-looking emails, GitHub installation IDs longer than12345678):git diff main...HEAD | grep -iE 'gabriel|gblosr|@gmail\.com|installation_id.*[0-9]{7,}'If there are matches, list them to the user and ask: "These look like they might violate the sanitization rule. Continue anyway?" If the user says yes, proceed. If no, abort.
-
Push the branch if not already pushed:
if ! git ls-remote --heads origin "$(git branch --show-current)" | grep -q .; then git push -u origin "$(git branch --show-current)" fi -
Draft the PR title in Conventional Commits format. Suggest one based on the most recent commits on the branch; let the user edit.
-
Draft the PR body matching
.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md's shape. Spec and issue references MUST be real markdown links pointing at the branch on origin (https://github.com/<owner>/<repo>/blob/<branch>/<path>), not bare backticked paths — outsiders reading the PR cannot click a backticked path:## Summary <1–3 bullets describing what changes and why> - ## Spec / issue Spec: [<path-or-title>](https://github.com/<owner>/<repo>/blob/<branch>/.vault/specs/<slug>/spec.md) Closes: #<N> ## Test plan <bulleted markdown checklist of how to verify> - [ ] ## Sanitization - [x] No real identifiers introduced in this diff (per [`.vault/rules/sanitization.md`](../.vault/rules/sanitization.md)). ## Quality gate - [x] `pnpm run quality-gate` is green locally.
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 · 100 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A df49aabd7e8c
new-pr is a command published in the GitHub repository ribeirogab/zeno-agent (10 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,154 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
ship
Branch, commit, open PR, gather Claude + every enabled AI reviewer (Copilot, CodeRabbit, etc.), fix/justify/resolve every finding, loop until clean, then merge. Run only when implementation is finished AND the owner has said to ship (e.g. "ship it") — never self-invoke just because the work looks done. To design and…
align
Context-aware alignment. In plan mode it audits the active plan and folds the amendments in. Otherwise it reviews the branch, a named branch, or a pull request against Ion's principles, authors a fix plan, and after approval implements and commits the fixes.
review
Unified review orchestrator — detect changes, dispatch reviewers, validate findings, optionally post GitHub inline comments.
work-pr
Creates a complete and well-documented Pull Request.
pr-enhance
Write or improve a pull request description, checklist, and review aids.
review
Review staged changes before committing.