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.
npx skills add jpoutrin/product-forge --skill review-django-commandsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jpoutrin/product-forgeWrote 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/skills/jpoutrin/product-forge/review-django-commands)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jpoutrin/product-forge/review-django-commands"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jpoutrin/product-forge/review-django-commands/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/skills/jpoutrin/product-forge/review-django-commands"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jpoutrin/product-forge/review-django-commands.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 | $0.00018 | $0.02402 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.01201 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00480 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00240 |
Grade A, and why
review-django-commands 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 380 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
review-django-commands
Category: Django Development
Usage
/review-django-commands [<app-path>] [--fix] [--verbose]
Arguments
| Argument | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
<app-path> |
No | Path to Django app or project (default: current directory) |
--fix |
No | Automatically refactor non-compliant commands |
--verbose |
No | Show detailed analysis for each command |
Purpose
Review Django management commands to ensure they follow the thin-command/service-layer pattern:
- Scans all management commands in the project
- Analyzes command structure for anti-patterns
- Reports compliance with best practices
- Refactors non-compliant commands (with
--fix)
Best Practice Pattern
Commands should be thin wrappers that delegate to services:
apps/{app}/
├── management/
│ └── commands/
│ └── {command_name}.py # Thin: parse args, call service, format output
└── services/
└── {domain}.py # Fat: business logic, DB operations
Good Pattern
# management/commands/publish_scheduled.py
class Command(BaseCommand):
def add_arguments(self, parser):
parser.add_argument("--dry-run", action="store_true")
def handle(self, *args, **options):
result = publish_scheduled_articles(dry_run=options["dry_run"])
self.stdout.write(self.style.SUCCESS(f"Published {result.count} articles"))
# services/publishing.py
def publish_scheduled_articles(dry_run: bool = False) -> PublishResult:
"""Business logic lives here - testable without command scaffolding."""
...
Anti-Patterns to Detect
| Anti-Pattern | Description | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| Fat commands | Business logic in handle() |
HIGH |
| Direct ORM queries | Complex querysets in command | HIGH |
| Missing service layer | No corresponding service file | MEDIUM |
| No type hints | Missing return types, parameters | LOW |
| No docstrings | Missing command help text | LOW |
| Hardcoded values | Magic numbers/strings in logic | MEDIUM |
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 First seen · 380 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A cc3aa09d8160
review-django-commands is a skill published in the GitHub repository jpoutrin/product-forge (16 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 2,402 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
platform-apex-generate
Primary Apex authoring skill for class generation, refactoring, and review. ALWAYS ACTIVATE when the user mentions Apex, .cls, triggers, or asks to create/refactor a class (service, selector, domain, batch, queueable, schedulable, invocable, DTO, utility, interface, abstract, exception, REST resource). Use this skill…
flow-next-impl-review
Carmack-level implementation review of changes via the configured backend. Use when asked to review code or a diff in a flow-next repo.
flow-next-resolve-pr
Resolve PR review feedback. Fetches unresolved threads, triages, fixes, replies and resolves via GraphQL. Use when asked to address review comments.
api-contract-review
Use when auditing CloudBase cloud API wrappers, MCP tools, generated action metadata, or related docs for outdated or incorrect action names, parameters, casing, request shapes, or missing contract tests, especially during periodic quality review or before preparing corrective PRs.
principle-model-the-domain
Apply when writing stateful logic, or when code branches a lot or repeats a shape assumption across files. Encode the domain in a structure instead of scattered conditionals.
api-reviewer
A review of an API contract, the agreed description of how software systems exchange requests, responses, events, or files.