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/xberg-io/crawlbergWrote 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/xberg-io/crawlberg/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/xberg-io/crawlberg/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/xberg-io/crawlberg/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/xberg-io/crawlberg/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/xberg-io/crawlberg/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 | $0.00145 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00058 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00029 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00015 |
Grade A, and why
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 7d 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
Review all staged and unstaged changes in the current repository.
For each changed file:
- Check for correctness and potential bugs
- Verify adherence to project conventions and coding standards
- Look for security issues (OWASP top 10, injection, secrets)
- Check test coverage for new/modified code
- Verify error handling is complete
Provide a concise summary of findings organized by severity (critical, warning, suggestion).
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.
- 7d ago Changed · +6 lines bd3877ec304b
- 1mo ago First seen · 20 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 68c424acd345
review is a command published in the GitHub repository xberg-io/crawlberg (188 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 145 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
OPSX: Explore
Enter explore mode - think through ideas, investigate problems, clarify requirements.
OPSX: Apply
Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change (Experimental).
OPSX: Archive
Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
OPSX: Propose
Propose a new change - create it and generate all artifacts in one step.
OPSX: Sync
Sync delta specs from a change to main specs.
devkit.github.review-pr
Provides comprehensive GitHub pull request review with code quality, security, and best practices analysis. Use when reviewing a PR before merging.