Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to xsovad06/sova. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/xsovad06/sova/main/.claude/commands/ingest-review.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/xsovad06/sovaWrote 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/xsovad06/sova/ingest-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/xsovad06/sova/ingest-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/xsovad06/sova/ingest-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/xsovad06/sova/ingest-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/xsovad06/sova/ingest-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 | $0.00020 | $0.01826 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00730 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00365 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00183 |
Grade A, and why
ingest-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 14d 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 — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Ingest PR Review Feedback
Parse structured review findings from TaskRun records and update agent memory.
Instructions
-
Get the PR number from
$ARGUMENTS. If empty, ask the user. Validate it is a positive integer before using it anywhere below: reject non-numeric input and ask the user to clarify rather than passing raw argument text into generated code.<PR_NUMBER>in every snippet in this command means this validated integer, never the raw$ARGUMENTStext. -
Query the database for reviewer TaskRun records linked to this PR. Substitute the validated integer for
<PR_NUMBER>: it becomes part of a Python expression evaluated viapython3 -c, so unvalidated text here is a code injection risk, not just a bad query:# Find the reviewer run's handoff data python3 -c " import asyncio, json, os os.environ.setdefault('SOVA_DATABASE_URL', 'sqlite+aiosqlite:///.claude/sova.db') from sova.db.session import init_db, get_session from sova.db.models import TaskRun from sqlalchemy import select async def main(): await init_db(run_migrations=False) async with await get_session() as session: stmt = select(TaskRun).where( TaskRun.pr_number == <PR_NUMBER>, TaskRun.role.in_(['reviewer', 'command:review-pr']), TaskRun.status == 'done', ).order_by(TaskRun.id.desc()).limit(1) run = (await session.execute(stmt)).scalar_one_or_none() if not run or not run.handoff_json: print('NO_FINDINGS') return print(json.dumps(run.handoff_json, indent=2)) asyncio.run(main()) " -
If the output is
NO_FINDINGS, do not stop here: the SOVA reviewer may simply not have run a TaskRun for this PR while external reviewers (CodeRabbit, human reviewers) still left comments. Continue to step 4 (there is nothing to parse from this source, so skip it) and step 5. Only report "No reviewer findings found for PR #N (no SOVA reviewer TaskRun and no external review comments)" and stop if step 5 also finds nothing.
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.
- 14d ago Changed · +20 lines 9d9f04035dcc
- 16d ago Changed 59861df3de2c
- 1mo ago Changed · +11 lines 1452f053a5ac
- 2mo ago First seen · 89 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A dea9b25df7bb
ingest-review is a command published in the GitHub repository xsovad06/sova (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 1,826 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
unforgit-curate
Review and improve Unforgit memory quality.
greptile-review
Execute the full Greptile review cycle on a PR, looping until score meets threshold or circuit breaker triggers.
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.
code-review-give
Give mode for code-review: Review someone else's code with multi-pass analysis and structured recommendations.
mach12:issue-review
Read a GitHub issue and all comments, review the implementation plan, and present findings.
plan-levels
At standard and lean, each row sets one phase's spawns. A phase with no row runs as written. A row only removes or merges agents.