Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to sillsdev/FieldWorks. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sillsdev/FieldWorks/main/.github/prompts/respond-to-review-comments.prompt.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sillsdev/FieldWorksWrote 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/sillsdev/fieldworks/respond-to-review-comments)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/sillsdev/fieldworks/respond-to-review-comments"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sillsdev/fieldworks/respond-to-review-comments.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 | $0.00031 | $0.00300 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00150 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00060 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00030 |
Grade A, and why
respond-to-review-comments 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 today.
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.
The source is not reproduced here
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
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.
- today First seen · 23 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 5fb590205909
respond-to-review-comments is a command published in the GitHub repository sillsdev/FieldWorks (111 stars, last pushed today), with no licence file. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 300 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-06.
Other commands, from other repositories
devkit.github.review-pr
Provides comprehensive GitHub pull request review with code quality, security, and best practices analysis. Use when reviewing a PR before merging.
speckit.spex.submit
Push and create PR for team review, with optional watch mode for CI monitoring.
git
The pre-finish status: branch, hygiene findings, message checks, workflow lint, template state.
advanced-code-review-context
Advanced Code Review Phase 2: Context Analysis - load previous reviews, PR history, declined items.
extend
Capture a mid-PR sub-idea and implement it onto the current open PR's branch — no new branch, no new PR. Preserves Verify → Review → Deliver.
check-pr
Check a PR's CI status, reviews, comments, and merge readiness.