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/RohiRIK/claude-code-configWrote 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/rohirik/claude-code-config/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/rohirik/claude-code-config/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/rohirik/claude-code-config/code-review/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/rohirik/claude-code-config/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/rohirik/claude-code-config/code-review.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 | $0.00012 | $0.00250 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00100 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00050 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00025 |
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 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to code-review — 11 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.
What it actually says
Code Review
Comprehensive security and quality review of uncommitted changes:
-
Get changed files: git diff --name-only HEAD
-
For each changed file, check for:
Security Issues (CRITICAL):
- Hardcoded credentials, API keys, tokens
- SQL injection vulnerabilities
- XSS vulnerabilities
- Missing input validation
- Insecure dependencies
- Path traversal risks
Code Quality (HIGH):
- Functions > 50 lines
- Files > 800 lines
- Nesting depth > 4 levels
- Missing error handling
- console.log statements
- TODO/FIXME comments
- Missing JSDoc for public APIs
Best Practices (MEDIUM):
- Mutation patterns (use immutable instead)
- Emoji usage in code/comments
- Missing tests for new code
- Accessibility issues (a11y)
-
Generate report with:
- Severity: CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW
- File location and line numbers
- Issue description
- Suggested fix
-
Block commit if CRITICAL or HIGH issues found
Never approve code with security vulnerabilities!
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 · 45 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A c17648d4e718
code-review is a command published in the GitHub repository RohiRIK/claude-code-config (10 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 250 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to code-review, differing in 11 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
refactor
Systematic code refactoring with smart scope detection.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
spec-trace-requirements
You are verifying that implementation changes trace back to specification requirements.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
boot
Start a new PromptKit prompt assembly session (alias for /bootstrap).