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/webdevtodayjason/titanium-pluginsWrote 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/webdevtodayjason/titanium-plugins/titanium-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/webdevtodayjason/titanium-plugins/titanium-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/webdevtodayjason/titanium-plugins/titanium-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/webdevtodayjason/titanium-plugins/titanium-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/webdevtodayjason/titanium-plugins/titanium-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 | $0.00006 | $0.03698 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.01479 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00740 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00370 |
Grade A, and why
titanium-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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 693 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Titanium Review Command
You are coordinating a comprehensive quality review of the codebase. This command launches multiple specialized review agents in parallel, aggregates their findings, and creates a detailed review report.
Orchestration Model: You launch 3 review agents simultaneously in separate context windows. Each agent has specialized skills and reviews from their domain expertise. They run in parallel for efficiency.
Review Agents & Their Skills:
- @code-reviewer: code-quality-standards, security-checklist, testing-strategy
- @security-scanner: security-checklist, code-quality-standards
- @tdd-specialist: testing-strategy, code-quality-standards
Why Parallel: Review agents are independent - they don't need each other's results. Running in parallel saves 60-70% time compared to sequential reviews.
Overview
This review process:
- Identifies what code to review
- Launches 3 review agents in parallel (single message, multiple Task calls)
- Aggregates and categorizes findings from all agents
- Uses vibe-check for meta-review
- Creates comprehensive review report
- Stores findings in Pieces LTM
- Presents actionable summary with severity-based recommendations
Step 1: Identify Review Scope
Determine What to Review
Option A: Recent Changes (default)
git diff --name-only HEAD~1
Reviews files changed in last commit.
Option B: Current Branch Changes
git diff --name-only main...HEAD
Reviews all changes in current branch vs main.
Option C: Specific Files (if user specified)
# User might say: /titanium:review src/api/*.ts
Use the files/pattern user specified.
Option D: All Code (if user requested)
# Find all source files
find . -type f \( -name "*.ts" -o -name "*.js" -o -name "*.py" -o -name "*.rb" \) -not -path "*/node_modules/*" -not -path "*/venv/*"
Build File List
Create list of files to review. Store in memory for agent prompts.
Example:
Files to review:
- src/api/auth.ts
- src/middleware/jwt.ts
- src/routes/users.ts
- tests/api/auth.test.ts
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 · 693 lines · 6 tokens per session scan A c74f10fdd1ce
titanium-review is a command published in the GitHub repository webdevtodayjason/titanium-plugins (7 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 6 tokens to every session and 3,698 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
refactor
Systematic code refactoring with smart scope detection.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
boot
Start a new PromptKit prompt assembly session (alias for /bootstrap).
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.