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/synaptic-labs-ai/pact-plugin/peer-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Synaptic-Labs-AI/PACT-PluginWrote 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/synaptic-labs-ai/pact-plugin/peer-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/synaptic-labs-ai/pact-plugin/peer-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/synaptic-labs-ai/pact-plugin/peer-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 5.1 | $0.00015 | $0.09398 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.04699 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.01880 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00940 |
Grade A, and why
peer-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 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 — 494 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review the current work: $ARGUMENTS
- Commit any uncommitted work
- Create a PR if one doesn't exist
- Review the PR
Task Hierarchy
Create a review Task hierarchy:
1. `TaskCreate`: Review task "Review: {feature}"
2. `TaskUpdate`: Review task status = "in_progress"
3. Analyze PR: Which reviewers needed?
4. `TaskCreate`: Reviewer agent tasks (architect, test-engineer, domain specialists)
5. `TaskUpdate`: Reviewer tasks status = "in_progress"
6. `TaskUpdate`: Review task addBlockedBy = [reviewer IDs]
7. Dispatch reviewers in parallel
8. Monitor until reviewers complete
9. `TaskUpdate`: Reviewer tasks status = "completed" (as each completes)
10. Synthesize findings
11. If major issues:
a. `TaskCreate`: Remediation agent tasks
b. `TaskUpdate`: Remediation tasks status = "in_progress"
c. Dispatch, monitor until complete
d. `TaskUpdate`: Remediation tasks status = "completed"
12. `TaskCreate`: "User: review minor issues" step task
13. Present minor issues to user, record decisions in step metadata
14. `TaskUpdate`: Step task status = "completed"
15. If "fix now" decisions:
a. `TaskCreate`: Remediation agent tasks
b. `TaskUpdate`: Remediation tasks status = "in_progress"
c. Dispatch, monitor until complete
d. `TaskUpdate`: Remediation tasks status = "completed"
16. `TaskCreate`: "Awaiting merge decision" approval task
17. Present to user, await approval
18. On approval: `TaskUpdate` approval task status = "completed"
19. `TaskUpdate`: Review task status = "completed", metadata.artifact = PR URL
Convention: Synchronous user steps (step tasks, approval tasks) skip the
in_progresstransition — they go directly frompendingtocompletedsince the orchestrator handles them inline without background dispatch.
Example structure:
[Review] "Review: user authentication"
├── [Agent] "architect: design review"
├── [Agent] "test-engineer: coverage review"
├── [Agent] "backend-coder: implementation review"
├── [Agent] "security-engineer: security review" (conditional)
├── [Agent] "qa-engineer: runtime verification" (conditional)
├── [Remediation] (dynamic, for major issues)
│ └── [Agent] "fix: auth vulnerability"
├── [Step] "User: review minor issues"
├── [Remediation] (dynamic, for "fix now" minors)
│ └── [Agent] "fix: input validation"
└── [Approval] "Awaiting merge decision"
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 Changed · +8 lines f0a67c67c130
- 6d ago First seen · 486 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 955748806753
peer-review is a command published in the GitHub repository Synaptic-Labs-AI/PACT-Plugin (71 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 9,398 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 2026-08-30.
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.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
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.