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/wangke19/gemini-ai-helpersWrote 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/wangke19/gemini-ai-helpers/crd-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/wangke19/gemini-ai-helpers/crd-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/wangke19/gemini-ai-helpers/crd-review/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/wangke19/gemini-ai-helpers/crd-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/wangke19/gemini-ai-helpers/crd-review.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 | $0.00011 | $0.02216 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.01108 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00443 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00222 |
Grade A, and why
crd-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 6d 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 — 279 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Name
openshift:crd-review
Synopsis
/openshift:crd-review [repository-path]
Description
The openshift:crd-review command analyzes Go Kubernetes Custom Resource Definitions (CRDs) in a repository against both:
- Kubernetes API Conventions as defined in the Kubernetes community guidelines
- OpenShift API Conventions as defined in the OpenShift development guide
This command helps ensure CRDs follow best practices for:
- API naming conventions and patterns
- Resource structure and field organization
- Status field design and patterns
- Field types and validation
- Documentation standards
- OpenShift-specific requirements
The review covers Go API type definitions, providing actionable feedback to improve API design.
Key Convention Checks
Kubernetes API Conventions
Naming Conventions
- Resource Names: Must follow DNS label format (lowercase, alphanumeric, hyphens)
- Field Names: PascalCase for Go, camelCase for JSON
- Avoid: Abbreviations, underscores, ambiguous names
- Include: Units/types in field names when needed (e.g.,
timeoutSeconds)
API Structure
- Required Fields: Every API object must embed a
k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1TypeMetastruct - Metadata: Every API object must include a
k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1ObjectMetastruct calledmetadata - Spec/Status Separation: Clear separation between desired state (spec) and observed state (status)
Status Field Design
- Conditions: Must include conditions array with:
type: Clear, human-readable condition typestatus:True,False, orUnknownreason: Machine-readable reason codemessage: Human-readable messagelastTransitionTime: RFC 3339 timestamp
Field Types
- Integers: Prefer
int32overint64 - Avoid: Unsigned integers, floating-point values
- Enums: Use string constants, not numeric values
- Optional Fields: Use pointers in Go
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 279 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 74ef2552c373
crd-review is a command published in the GitHub repository wangke19/gemini-ai-helpers (2 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 2,216 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
audit-quick
Run a quick codebase orientation scan — Phases 0 and 1 only (architecture map + health assessment). Skips deep analysis (security, performance, code quality) and the roadmap. Good for onboarding onto a new project or a fast pre-review checkup. Run /audit --resume later to continue with the deep phases.
review
Perform a comprehensive code review with actionable feedback.
adversarial-review
Get a devil's advocate review that challenges your design decisions.
bmad-build
Turns a work item — feature, story, bug fix, change request — into working code, reviewed and verified. Use when the user hands over an outcome and leaves the edits to you; a bare story or issue link counts. Also use whenever the user asks BMAD by name — then any change qualifies, even a tiny fully-specified edit. Do…
bmad-review-edge-case-hunter
Deprecated — forwards to bmad-review.
adr-review
Run the workflow in docs/playbooks/adr-review.md. You review only — never write or rewrite the ADR for me. Check problem framing, option fairness, trade-offs and consequences, reversibility, the revisit trigger, and weak reasoning. Give pointed questions and concrete suggestions; I write the words. If it supersedes an…