How long does the integration take?

Change one base URL in an OpenAI-compatible client, or install the Python or TypeScript SDK; the quickstart routes a first request in a few minutes.

Will this lock us into another vendor?

No. The router is Apache-2.0 open source, your provider keys stay yours, and the API is OpenAI-compatible, so leaving is a change of base URL.

What happens when a provider fails?

The router falls back to the next model your policy allows and records the fallback in the trace, so an outage costs a retry, not an incident.

code-review-feature - Prompt

Name: code-review-feature
Author: Ragrawal2004

Prompt file imported from Ragrawal2004/spendly (.claude/commands/code-review-feature.md). Fill in {{arguments}} before use. Copyright stays with the author.

Review the Spendly changes on this branch. Step spec (optional): {{arguments}}

Pre-flight

Collect the review diff from three parts:

git diff main...HEAD — commits on this branch
git diff — unstaged work
git diff --staged — staged work

If all three are empty, reply "No changes detected" and stop. Untracked files appear in none of them; to include a new file, git add -N <file> it first.

Review

Launch the spendly-security-reviewer and spendly-quality-reviewer subagents at the same time, in one message, so they run in parallel. The reviewers have no shell, so do not tell them to run git. Paste the full text of the combined diff (all three parts, each under its own heading) into each reviewer's prompt, with the step spec (if given), and tell it to review the whole combined diff.

Verdict

Map the reviewers' groups (the quality reviewer's Worth improving counts as Should fix):

any Blocking item → CHANGES REQUESTED
Should fix items but no Blocking → APPROVED WITH SUGGESTIONS
only Nit items, or none → APPROVED

Combined Action Plan

Under the verdict, list every finding in this order: Blocking, then Should fix, then Nit. Give each item its file:line and which reviewer raised it, and merge duplicates. Write "none" for an empty group.

Then stop and wait for me. Nothing is edited before I approve it.

Rules

Never edit any file, and never commit, stage or stash anything.
Never print DATABASE_URL, SPENDLY_TEST_DATABASE_URL, passwords or secrets.

Install code-review-feature and it becomes one more candidate the router can pick - when it fits.

A listing is a routing target with a manifest: what it does, which domains it covers, what it costs and who publishes it. Once installed it sits beside your own models and tools, is scored like any other candidate for each request, and shows up in the trace when it wins. Ratings come from workspaces that installed it, one per account.

{ "prompt": "Review the Spendly changes on this branch. Step spec (optional): {{arguments}}\n\n## Pre-flight\n\nCollect the review diff from three parts:\n- `git diff main...HEAD` — commits on this branch\n- `git diff` — unstaged work\n- `git diff --staged` — staged work\n\nIf all three are empty, reply \"No changes detected\" and stop. Untracked files appear in none of them; to include a new file, `git add -N <file>` it first.\n\n## Review\n\nLaunch the **spendly-security-reviewer** and **spendly-quality-reviewer** subagents at the same time, in one message, so they run in parallel. The reviewers have no shell, so do not tell them to run git. Paste the full text of the combined diff (all three parts, each under its own heading) into each reviewer's prompt, with the step spec (if given), and tell it to review the whole combined diff.\n\n## Verdict\n\nMap the reviewers' groups (the quality reviewer's **Worth improving** counts as **Should fix**):\n- any **Blocking** item → **CHANGES REQUESTED**\n- **Should fix** items but no Blocking → **APPROVED WITH SUGGESTIONS**\n- only **Nit** items, or none → **APPROVED**\n\n## Combined Action Plan\n\nUnder the verdict, list every finding in this order: **Blocking**, then **Should fix**, then **Nit**. Give each item its `file:line` and which reviewer raised it, and merge duplicates. Write \"none\" for an empty group.\n\nThen stop and wait for me. Nothing is edited before I approve it.\n\n## Rules\n\n- Never edit any file, and never commit, stage or stash anything.\n- Never print `DATABASE_URL`, `SPENDLY_TEST_DATABASE_URL`, passwords or secrets.", "variables": [ "arguments" ], "notes": "Run the security and quality reviews of this branch's changes in parallel and combine their findings Tools: Bash(git diff:*). Arguments: Optional step spec, e.g. 06-add-expense.", "metadata": { "source": { "provider": "github-claude-commands", "repository": "https://github.com/Ragrawal2004/spendly", "path": ".claude/commands/code-review-feature.md", "ref": "f5c53a9b710734b3d8acd104258a561a3363b19e", "url": "https://github.com/Ragrawal2004/spendly/blob/f5c53a9b710734b3d8acd104258a561a3363b19e/.claude/commands/code-review-feature.md", "key": "Ragrawal2004/spendly/.claude/commands/code-review-feature.md" } } }

code-review-feature

About

Pre-flight

Review

Verdict

Combined Action Plan

Rules

Use it

Install code-review-feature and it becomes one more candidate the router can pick - when it fits.

What it costs to adopt - in engineering time.

One base URL

No vendor lock-in

Failover built in

Manifest

Reviews