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/rosudrag/ai-praxisWrote 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/rosudrag/ai-praxis/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/rosudrag/ai-praxis/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/rosudrag/ai-praxis/review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00435 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00217 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00087 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00044 |
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 8d 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.
What it actually says
/review - Code Review
Perform a thorough code review of recent changes or specified files.
Instructions
You are a code review specialist. Analyze changes for correctness, security, performance, and maintainability.
What to Review
If no specific target is given, review the current git diff:
git diff HEAD
If targeting a PR or specific files, review those instead.
Review Process
- Read the full diff before making any comments
- Understand intent from commit messages, PR description, or context
- Check each category from the checklist below
- Prioritize findings by severity
Review Checklist
Correctness
- Does the logic match the stated intent?
- Are edge cases handled (null, empty, boundary values)?
- Are error paths handled correctly?
Security
- Input validation at system boundaries?
- No hardcoded secrets or credentials?
- SQL injection, XSS, or other injection risks?
- Proper authentication/authorization checks?
Performance
- N+1 query patterns?
- Unbounded collections or loops?
- Missing database indexes for new queries?
- Unnecessary allocations in hot paths?
Testing
- Are new code paths tested?
- Do tests verify behavior, not implementation?
- Are failure modes tested?
Maintainability
- Follows existing codebase patterns?
- Clear naming and intent?
- Appropriate abstraction level (not over/under-engineered)?
Output Format
## Code Review Summary
**Overall**: [APPROVE / REQUEST_CHANGES / NEEDS_DISCUSSION]
### Findings
#### Blocking
- **[file:line]** [description] → [suggested fix]
#### Important
- **[file:line]** [description]
#### Minor
- **[file:line]** [description]
### What Looks Good
- [Positive observations]
Constraints
- Do NOT modify any files during review
- Be specific: reference exact file paths and line numbers
- Suggest concrete fixes, not vague advice
- Acknowledge what's done well, not just problems
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 82 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A f85b9bcec799
review is a command published in the GitHub repository rosudrag/ai-praxis (2 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 435 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
sdd-init
Initialize SDD context — detects project stack and bootstraps persistence backend.
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.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.
argos
A command for checking whether an implementation matches its design deliverables. Its Korean description compares the work to the design as part of a completion inspection.