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.
npx agentmods add commands/srstomp/pokayokay/reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/srstomp/pokayokayWrote 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/srstomp/pokayokay/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/srstomp/pokayokay/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/srstomp/pokayokay/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 | $0.00006 | $0.00773 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00387 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00001 | $0.00155 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00077 |
Grade A, and why
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 5d 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 — 131 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Session Review Workflow
Analyze recent work sessions to identify what went well, what went wrong, and patterns to improve.
Steps
1. Get Session History
Use ohno MCP get_session_context or:
npx @stevestomp/ohno-cli context
2. Review Completed Tasks
npx @stevestomp/ohno-cli tasks
Check for patterns:
- Tasks that took longer than expected
- Tasks that were blocked
- Tasks completed quickly
3. Check Git History
git log --oneline -20
Look for:
- Commit frequency and quality
- Reverts or fixes
- Patterns in commit messages
4. Identify What Went Well
- Features completed successfully
- Clean implementations
- Good test coverage
- Smooth handoffs
5. Identify What Went Wrong
- Blockers encountered
- Tasks that needed rework
- Missing requirements discovered late
- Context loss between sessions
6. Extract Patterns
Document recurring issues:
- Common blockers
- Frequent mistake types
- Areas needing more upfront planning
6.1 Skill Effectiveness Analysis
Skills Used This Session
Review which skills were invoked and their outcomes:
| Skill | Times Used | Success Rate | Avg Duration |
|-------|------------|--------------|--------------|
| api-design | 3 | 100% | 45 min |
| testing-strategy | 2 | 50% | 60 min |
| spike | 1 | GO decision | 2.5 hours |
Spike Outcomes
Track spike decisions and follow-through:
| Spike | Decision | Follow-up Created | Implemented |
|---|---|---|---|
| D1 Multi-tenant | GO | 3 tasks | 1 of 3 |
| Redis Caching | NO-GO | 0 tasks | N/A |
Skill Gaps Identified
Note when work would have benefited from a skill:
- Database migration manually done - would benefit from
database-design - CI pipeline created without
ci-cd- missing caching optimization - No security review on auth changes - should use
security-audit
6.2 Session Quality Metrics
| Metric | This Session | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| Tasks completed | 5 | +2 vs avg |
| Tasks blocked | 1 | Same |
| Bugs discovered | 2 | +1 vs avg |
| Spikes completed | 1 | New |
| Skills invoked | 3 | +1 vs avg |
| Commits per task | 1.2 | Same |
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 131 lines · 6 tokens per session scan A e52327dcc319
review is a command published in the GitHub repository srstomp/pokayokay (9 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 6 tokens to every session and 773 once invoked, about $0.0000 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.