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/sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkitWrote 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/sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkit/product-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkit/product-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkit/product-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 | $0.00057 | $0.01103 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00551 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00221 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00110 |
Grade A, and why
product-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 7d 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 — 151 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/product-review — Multi-Persona Business Review
Purpose
Solo founders don't have a product manager, a CMO, a CFO, or a target user in the room. This command simulates that room — four personas review the feature from four orthogonal angles and produce explicit verdicts.
Parallel to /council (which reviews technical correctness). /product-review
reviews business correctness.
When to Use
- Before committing to a major feature build (≥ 1 week of work)
- Before pricing or billing changes
- Before launching to a new market segment
- Before pivot or major direction shift
- After cheapest experiment runs — to decide build / kill / iterate
NOT for:
- Trivial bug fixes
- Internal refactors
- Visual polish (use UI review skills instead)
Usage
/product-review "feature description"
/product-review .planning/product/<slug>.md
/product-review --lite "feature description"
Flags:
--lite— 3-question fast review (skip CFO + Marketer if no pricing/channel concerns)--persona <name>— run only one persona (skeptic / marketer / cfo / user-empath)--council— combine with/counciltechnical review in one report
Procedure
-
Idempotency — derive
<feature-slug>from input. Check.planning/product/<slug>.md. If missing → invokeproduct-thinkingskill first. If present → use as input. -
Personas activated (parallel):
- product-skeptic — devil's advocate, attacks the idea from every angle
- marketer-pragmatist — "how do I sell this? what's the channel? what's the message?"
- cfo-pragmatist — "does the math work? what's CAC, LTV, payback?"
- user-empath — "as the actual target user, would I use this? when? why?"
-
Each persona produces:
- Verdict: APPROVED / REVISE / REJECT
- Top 3 concerns
- Suggested changes
- Confidence (high/medium/low)
-
Aggregation:
- If all 4 APPROVED → status
validated - If 1+ REJECT → status
needs-revisionwith consolidated changes - If mixed → status
needs-experimentwith explicit decision rule
- If all 4 APPROVED → status
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 151 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A 4ea58ee8c35c
product-review is a command published in the GitHub repository sergei-aronsen/claude-code-toolkit (5 stars, last pushed 21d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 1,103 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.