review-full

A pre-push code-review workflow that simplifies changed code, checks it as a senior engineer would, and organizes commits. A pre-push check runs before changes are sent to a shared repository.

In plain words
What is it for?
It helps inspect changed files, remove duplication and dead code, simplify functions, check efficiency, run tests, and prepare cleaner commit history.
Why use it?
It helps catch unnecessary complexity and other issues before creating a pull request, which is a request for teammates to review and merge code.

Command for Claude Code

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/xsovad06/sova/review-full
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/xsovad06/sova

Made for: Claude Code.

Per session 26 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 886 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00026 $0.00886
Opus 5 $0.00013 $0.00443
Sonnet 5 $0.00005 $0.00177
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00089

Measured 2d ago against content hash ab647de8de51, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

review-full 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 2d 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.

.claude/commands/review-full.md · 106 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 106 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Full Review Pipeline

Run a complete pre-push quality pipeline: simplify code, review for issues, then organize commits into clean history.

# Benchmark logging (entry)
bash .claude/benchmark/log.sh "review_start" "" "" 2>/dev/null || true

Scope: $ARGUMENTS

Phase 1: Simplify

Follow the /simplify workflow -- review all changed code for opportunities to reduce complexity:

  1. Get the diff scope:

    git diff main..HEAD --stat
    git diff --cached --stat
    git diff --stat
    
  2. For each changed file, read the entire file and check:

    • Code reuse: does new code duplicate existing utilities or helpers? Search the codebase.
    • Over-engineering: unnecessary abstractions, premature generalization, excessive configurability
    • Dead code: unused imports, unreachable branches, commented-out code
    • Redundancy: repeated logic that could be a shared helper (only if 3+ occurrences)
    • Complexity: can any function be simplified without losing clarity?
    • Efficiency: redundant computations, repeated file reads, duplicate API calls
  3. Apply simplifications directly. After each change, verify tests still pass (see CLAUDE.md for commands).

  4. If no simplifications are needed, state that and move on.

Phase 2: Review

Follow the /review command workflow:

  1. Review all changed files for bugs, security, performance, test coverage, consistency, doc freshness, and scout rule (fix pre-existing issues in touched files).
  2. Score each finding (1-10 priority). Address all findings (fix or acknowledge with justification).
  3. Run the full CI-equivalent checks: {{ check_cmd }}. Fix any failures before proceeding.
  4. Report findings in the standard review format.

See /review for the full review checklist and scoring criteria.

Phase 3: Organize Commits

Follow the /rearrange-commits command workflow:

  1. Soft reset all commits back to origin/main (stash uncommitted changes first if needed).
  2. Create small, logical, atomic commits in dependency order.
  3. Verify: all changes committed, each commit atomic, total diff matches original.

Read the full file on GitHub · 106 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 106 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A ab647de8de51

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-full is a command published in the GitHub repository xsovad06/sova (2 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 886 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 2026-08-31.