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/Sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-marketWrote 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/sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market/code-reviewer/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/sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market/code-reviewer.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 | $0.00009 | $0.00843 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00337 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00169 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00084 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured today.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 107 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Review
Review the current changes using specialized review agents, each focusing on a different aspect of code quality. This plugin ships two of them: code-reviewer (guidelines, bugs, general quality) and code-simplifier (clarity and refinement after review).
Review aspects (optional): "$ARGUMENTS"
Review Workflow
-
Determine review scope
- Check
git statusandgit diff --name-onlyto identify changed files - Parse arguments to see if the user requested specific review aspects
- Default: run all applicable reviews
- In a pull-request context, read the PR's diff too:
gh pr diff
- Check
-
Available review aspects
- code - General code review for project guidelines (default)
- errors - Check error handling for silent failures, inadequate catch blocks, unjustified fallbacks
- tests - Review test coverage quality and completeness for the changed behavior
- simplify - Simplify code for clarity and maintainability after the review passes
- all - Run all applicable reviews (default)
-
Determine applicable reviews
Based on the changes:
- Always applicable: the
code-revieweragent (guidelines, bugs, quality) - If error handling changed: review silent failures — error swallowing, broad catches, fallbacks without user awareness
- If behavior changed without tests: review coverage gaps for the changed behavior
- After the review passes and the user asks: the
code-simplifieragent polishes and refines
- Always applicable: the
-
Launch review agents
Delegate each applicable aspect with
subagent_run, giving every agent the full diff plus the file paths to focus on. Launch independent agents in one message so they run in parallel; results come back together.Each agent reviews only — findings come back as a list with file, line, the problem, a confidence score, and a concrete fix suggestion.
-
Aggregate results
After the agents complete, summarize:
- Critical issues (must fix before merge)
- Important issues (should fix)
- Suggestions (nice to have)
- Positive observations (what's good)
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 · 107 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A e70c363a28d3
code-reviewer is a command published in the GitHub repository Sivan757/dsh-agent-plugins-market (13 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 843 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-10-18.
Other commands, from other repositories
memory-report
Calibration + inventory check of your causal memory (prediction ledger accuracy, what you know).
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.