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/sigistry/marketplaceWrote 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/sigistry/marketplace/schema-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/sigistry/marketplace/schema-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sigistry/marketplace/schema-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/sigistry/marketplace/schema-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sigistry/marketplace/schema-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 | $0.00016 | $0.00701 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00351 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00140 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00070 |
Grade A, and why
schema-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 6d 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 — 39 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review the DDL, schema files, or migration directory at $ARGUMENTS (default: the repo's schema/migration files) for relational design anti-patterns, and emit corrected DDL. This is a static review of the DDL text, no database connection required. Load the schema-antipatterns skill for the checklist.
Process
Step 1: Locate and parse the schema
Find the DDL source. Common locations: schema.sql, structure.sql, db/schema.rb, prisma/schema.prisma, Alembic/Django/Rails migration dirs, *.sql under migrations/. Detect the dialect (Postgres vs MySQL) from types and syntax. Build a mental model of tables, columns, types, keys, constraints, and indexes.
Step 2: Check against the anti-pattern catalog
Apply the schema-antipatterns skill's references/schema-checklist.md. Look for:
| Category | Anti-pattern to flag |
|---|---|
| Keys | Missing primary key; natural key with no surrogate where churny; UUID PK stored as text |
| Foreign keys | FK column with no supporting index; missing FK where a relationship clearly exists |
| Types | Money as float/double; timestamps as timestamp without time zone; cargo-cult VARCHAR(255); enum stored as loose VARCHAR; boolean stored as int/char(1) |
| Constraints | Nullable-everything; missing NOT NULL on required columns; missing UNIQUE/CHECK; no default where one is clearly intended |
| Indexing | Over-indexing; duplicate/redundant indexes (one is a prefix of another); index on a low-selectivity boolean |
| Integrity | No ON DELETE/ON UPDATE action stated; soft-delete without a partial unique index |
Step 3: Assign severity
Rank each finding: Critical (data-loss or integrity risk, e.g. money as float, missing PK), High (correctness/perf, e.g. unindexed FK, missing NOT NULL), Medium (maintainability, e.g. VARCHAR(255), duplicate index), Low (style/naming).
Step 4: Report
Emit:
## Findings: a table:Severity | Table.Column | Anti-pattern | Why it matters | Fix. Cite the file:line of each flagged DDL statement.## Corrected DDL: the fixedCREATE TABLE/ALTER TABLEfor the Critical and High findings. If a fix requires a data migration (e.g. changing a live column type), note that it must go through/migration-safetyrather than a rawALTER.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 39 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 845204e4b0a1
schema-review is a command published in the GitHub repository sigistry/marketplace (3 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 701 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.
Other commands, from other repositories
f5-db
Database operations and migrations.
typescript-dev
Start TypeScript development workflow with architecture, implementation, review, and testing phases.
compliance-fix
Show Qualimetry review findings for a file and apply the standards-compliant fix.
refactor-stack
Coordinated architecture refactor — change database, cloud provider, or framework with full SDL consistency.
f5-jira
Jira integration - setup, sync, status, convert, issues, attachments.
f5-checkpoint
This command has been consolidated into /f5-ctx.