review

review is a command for coding agents from rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit. It costs 21 tokens per session (604 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A command that reviews uncommitted code changes or a specified file or directory for correctness, security, performance, and maintainability problems.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review staged or unstaged changes, or to inspect the latest commit when there are no current changes.
Why use it?
It helps find defects and security risks before changes are merged, including issues involving null values, asynchronous code, queries, and credentials.

Command

Part of the code-guardian plugin — 2 commands, 1 agent shipped together

About the project

Awesome Claude Code Toolkit is a curated collection of extensions and configuration for Claude Code, including agents, skills, commands, plugins, hooks, rules, templates, MCP configurations, and companion apps. It is for Claude Code users who want ready-made workflows and integrations for different development tasks. The catalogue add-ons are selected components from this toolkit.

rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit · 2,585 stars · on GitHub

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/rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit/review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit

Or install code-guardian, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 2 commands, 1 agent.

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/rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit/review.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/commands/rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit/review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit/review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 21 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 604 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original 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 $0.00021 $0.00604
Opus 5 $0.00010 $0.00302
Sonnet 5 $0.00004 $0.00121
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00060

Measured yesterday against content hash 0597b8aaee75, 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 yesterday.

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.

plugins/code-guardian/commands/review.md · 72 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 72 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

/code-guardian:review

Perform a thorough code review of the current uncommitted changes or a specified file/directory.

Process

  1. Gather the changes to review:

    • Run git diff for unstaged changes and git diff --cached for staged changes
    • If a specific file or directory is provided as an argument, focus the review there
    • If no changes exist, review the most recent commit with git diff HEAD~1
  2. Analyze each changed file across these dimensions:

Correctness

  • Logic errors, off-by-one mistakes, incorrect boolean conditions
  • Unhandled null/undefined values and missing error boundaries
  • Race conditions in async code, missing awaits, unhandled promise rejections
  • Incorrect type assertions or unsafe casts

Security

  • User input flowing to SQL queries, shell commands, or file paths without sanitization
  • Hardcoded credentials, API keys, tokens, or connection strings
  • Missing authentication or authorization checks on new endpoints
  • Unsafe deserialization of external data

Performance

  • N+1 query patterns in database access
  • Unnecessary re-renders in React components (missing memoization, unstable references)
  • Unbounded data fetching without pagination or limits
  • Synchronous blocking operations on hot paths
  • Memory leaks from unclosed resources, event listeners, or subscriptions

Design

  • Single Responsibility violations: functions or classes doing too many things
  • Tight coupling between modules that should be independent
  • Missing abstractions where patterns repeat three or more times
  • Public API surface area: are new exports intentional and well-designed?

Readability

  • Variable and function names that obscure intent
  • Deeply nested conditionals that should be flattened or extracted
  • Magic numbers or strings that should be named constants
  • Missing or misleading type annotations
  1. Classify each finding by severity:
    • CRITICAL - Will cause bugs, data loss, or security vulnerabilities in production
    • WARNING - Likely to cause issues under certain conditions or during maintenance
    • SUGGESTION - Improvement opportunity that is not urgent

Read the full file on GitHub · 72 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. yesterday First seen · 72 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 0597b8aaee75

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review is a command published in the GitHub repository rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit (2,585 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 604 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.