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/stepolan/marketing-repo-templateWrote 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/stepolan/marketing-repo-template/review-content)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/stepolan/marketing-repo-template/review-content"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/stepolan/marketing-repo-template/review-content/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/stepolan/marketing-repo-template/review-content"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/stepolan/marketing-repo-template/review-content.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 | $0.00015 | $0.00385 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00192 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00077 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00038 |
Grade A, and why
review-content 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 10d 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.
What it actually says
Review the specified content file for brand alignment and quality.
Target file: $ARGUMENTS
-
Read the file and load context:
- The relevant author's
authors/<name>/voice/voice-profile.md brand/voice-guidelines.mdbrand/author-bios.md
- The relevant author's
-
Check these areas:
Lead quality:
- Does the first 3 sentences deliver the main insight?
- Journey trap? (building up chronologically)
- Context trap? (front-loading background before the point)
- Fairness trap? ("many valid approaches" before taking a position)
Voice consistency:
- Run the full voice check (contractions, em dashes, passive voice, tone, etc.)
Bio and title:
- Correct title per
brand/author-bios.md? - Bio format matches the content type?
Proof points:
- Are claims supported with specifics?
- Any unsupported assertions?
Formatting:
- Blog: flowing paragraphs?
- LinkedIn: short paragraphs (2-3 sentences)?
- Frontmatter complete (author, date, tags, pillar, campaign)?
-
Report:
## Content Review — [filename] ### Lead Quality: [Strong / Needs Work] [Details] ### Voice: [Strong / Needs Work / Off Voice] [Details with line numbers] ### Brand Alignment: [Aligned / Gaps] [Details] ### Recommended Actions 1. [Specific action] 2. [Specific action]
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 58 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 9377c75d9931
review-content is a command published in the GitHub repository stepolan/marketing-repo-template (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 385 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
blog-assets
Build HTML templates for each visual placeholder in a blog article and batch-export them as 1200x675 PNGs at 2x. Fourth step in the blog production pipeline.
repurpose
Fan a QA'd long-form piece (blog, research, weekly report) down into 6 channel-native formats — X thread, X singles, LinkedIn article, newsletter snippet, and pull-quote cards. Every output is canon-checked and staged for review.
blog-pipeline
Reference document showing the full Blog Engine flow with human approval gates. This is not an executable command — it's a map of how blog commands connect.
compliance-check
Jurisdiction-aware content compliance validation. Scans copy for regulatory violations, banned claims, missing disclaimers, and financial promotion language.
blog-publish
Push a completed blog article to the CMS -- upload images, create CMS item, sync components. Final step in the blog production pipeline.
community-harvest
Mine community channels (Discord, Slack, Telegram) for recurring questions, pain points, and feature requests. Produces actionable content briefs and documentation gap reports.