tdd-review

A team-based code review command for a Go software development kit, with focused reviewers for Go style, errors, types, tests, and matching behavior in a Python SDK. TDD means test-driven development, where tests help guide implementation.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it for full SDK reviews or focused checks of errors, type design, tests, and cross-language behavior.
Why use it?
It brings several specialized checks into one review and can compare the Go and Python versions. This helps find defects or inconsistencies that one general review might miss.

Command for Claude Code

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/severity1/claude-agent-sdk-go/tdd-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/severity1/claude-agent-sdk-go

Made for: Claude Code.

Per session 13 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 2,989 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 $0.00013 $0.02989
Opus 5 $0.00006 $0.01494
Sonnet 5 $0.00003 $0.00598
Haiku 4.5 $0.00001 $0.00299

Measured yesterday against content hash 0f59cce98ce4, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

tdd-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.

.claude/commands/tdd-review.md · 313 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 313 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

TDD Code Review (Team-Based)

Comprehensive code review for the Go SDK. Orchestrates multiple reviewers to analyze Go idioms, error handling, type design, test coverage, and Python SDK parity.

Prerequisite: Load Deferred Tools

Team and task orchestration tools (TeamCreate, TeamDelete, TaskCreate, TaskUpdate, TaskList, TaskGet, SendMessage, AskUserQuestion) are deferred in this harness. Before entering Phase 1, load them via:

ToolSearch(query="select:TeamCreate,TeamDelete,TaskCreate,TaskUpdate,TaskList,TaskGet,SendMessage,AskUserQuestion", max_results=8)

Skip this for quick-mode runs.

Quick Mode Exception

For focused reviews, use a single bare Agent call (model: "sonnet") with NO team:

  • --quick — Only grumpy-gopher
  • --errors — Only pr-review-toolkit:silent-failure-hunter
  • --types — Only pr-review-toolkit:type-design-analyzer
  • --tests — Only pr-review-toolkit:pr-test-analyzer
  • --paritygrumpy-gopher with explicit instructions to cross-reference docs/tracking/README.md and ../claude-agent-sdk-python/ for Python SDK divergence

If $ARGUMENTS contains any of these flags, extract the flag, launch the single appropriate agent with the file list, present results, and stop. Do not create a team, do not load team tools.


Review Scope Detection

Determine what code to review:

  1. User-specified files: If user provided specific files or packages after the flag/arguments, use those.
  2. Unstaged changes: git diff --name-only
  3. Staged changes: git diff --staged --name-only
  4. Default: Current package (./...)
git diff --name-only
git diff --staged --name-only

Store the file list. If no files found, report and exit cleanly (no team created).


Reviewer Selection

Based on files identified, select reviewers:

File Pattern Reviewer
internal/control/* grumpy-gopher, pr-review-toolkit:silent-failure-hunter
internal/parser/* grumpy-gopher, pr-review-toolkit:silent-failure-hunter
internal/subprocess/* grumpy-gopher, pr-review-toolkit:silent-failure-hunter
internal/cli/* grumpy-gopher
internal/shared/* grumpy-gopher, pr-review-toolkit:type-design-analyzer
Root *.go (public API: client.go, query.go, options.go, errors.go, transport.go) grumpy-gopher, pr-review-toolkit:type-design-analyzer
*_test.go, *_bench_test.go pr-review-toolkit:pr-test-analyzer
examples/* grumpy-gopher (informational only)
Any Go file grumpy-gopher, pr-review-toolkit:silent-failure-hunter (always)
Scope spans 2+ packages Add pr-review-toolkit:code-reviewer
Diff adds large docstrings/comment blocks Add pr-review-toolkit:comment-analyzer

Read the full file on GitHub · 313 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 · 313 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 0f59cce98ce4

Subscribe to this mod's changes

tdd-review is a command published in the GitHub repository severity1/claude-agent-sdk-go (169 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 2,989 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 2026-08-30.