Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to ypolon7kiy/akashi. 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/ypolon7kiy/akashi/master/.claude/commands/review-pr.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ypolon7kiy/akashiWrote 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/ypolon7kiy/akashi/review-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/ypolon7kiy/akashi/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ypolon7kiy/akashi/review-pr/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/ypolon7kiy/akashi/review-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ypolon7kiy/akashi/review-pr.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 | $0.00007 | $0.01189 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00594 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00001 | $0.00238 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
review-pr scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 10d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
100% identical to review-pr — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 190 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Comprehensive PR Review
Run a comprehensive pull request review using multiple specialized agents, each focusing on a different aspect of code quality.
Review Aspects (optional): "$ARGUMENTS"
Review Workflow:
-
Determine Review Scope
- Check git status to identify changed files
- Parse arguments to see if user requested specific review aspects
- Default: Run all applicable reviews
-
Available Review Aspects:
- comments - Analyze code comment accuracy and maintainability
- tests - Review test coverage quality and completeness
- errors - Check error handling for silent failures
- types - Analyze type design and invariants (if new types added)
- code - General code review for project guidelines
- simplify - Simplify code for clarity and maintainability
- all - Run all applicable reviews (default)
-
Identify Changed Files
- Run
git diff --name-onlyto see modified files - Check if PR already exists:
gh pr view - Identify file types and what reviews apply
- Run
-
Determine Applicable Reviews
Based on changes:
- Always applicable: code-reviewer (general quality)
- If test files changed: pr-test-analyzer
- If comments/docs added: comment-analyzer
- If error handling changed: silent-failure-hunter
- If types added/modified: type-design-analyzer
- After passing review: code-simplifier (polish and refine)
-
Launch Review Agents
Sequential approach (one at a time):
- Easier to understand and act on
- Each report is complete before next
- Good for interactive review
Parallel approach (user can request):
- Launch all agents simultaneously
- Faster for comprehensive review
- Results come back together
-
Aggregate Results
After agents complete, summarize:
- Critical Issues (must fix before merge)
- Important Issues (should fix)
- Suggestions (nice to have)
- Positive Observations (what's good)
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 190 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A 5e70c17293a0
review-pr is a command published in the GitHub repository ypolon7kiy/akashi (3 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 1,189 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to review-pr, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
sdd-init
Initialize SDD context — detects project stack and bootstraps persistence backend.
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
repo-audit
Audit a codebase (local or remote GitHub/GitLab) against architecture principles and requirements, surfacing drift, risk, and missing decisions.
argos
A command for checking whether an implementation matches its design deliverables. Its Korean description compares the work to the design as part of a completion inspection.