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/tonychen15/xReviewWrote 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/tonychen15/xreview/refactor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/tonychen15/xreview/refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/tonychen15/xreview/refactor/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/tonychen15/xreview/refactor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/tonychen15/xreview/refactor.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00128 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00051 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00026 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00013 |
Grade A, and why
refactor scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
88% identical to feature — 6 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
/refactor — Refactor code with xReview
IMPORTANT: You MUST run this shell command FIRST before doing anything else:
xreview claude refactor "$ARGUMENTS"
Read the script's output carefully. It tells you the session number and what to append to .review/REVIEW.md.
Then follow these steps:
- Append the session header and "Implementing" line to .review/REVIEW.md (use the exact format from the script output)
- Perform the refactoring described in the objective
- When done, run
xreview reviewto trigger the reviewer
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 15 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A bfc937ce582e
refactor is a command published in the GitHub repository tonychen15/xReview (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 128 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to feature, differing in 6 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
review-pr
Review a pull request or the current branch with four specialist agents in parallel (code-reviewer for correctness and security, silent-failure-hunter, test-gap-analyzer, type-design-reviewer), then merge their findings into one severity-ranked review with file:line anchors and no duplicates, optionally posted to the…
dual-review
Adversarial dual review — two independent reviewers with no shared context; both must approve before merge.
review-pr
Review a GitHub pull request by number.
review
Review the current diff against the project rules.
confirm-revisions
Toggle Second Pass re-judge after revision. true = verify lift in a loop (more tokens, more confidence). false = trust judge's feedback, ship after one revision (default, cheaper).
passing-grade
Set the Second Pass passing grade. Any output graded below this bar triggers a revision loop. Accepts A, B, C, D, or F.