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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hmj1026/dhpkWrote 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/agents/hmj1026/dhpk/codex-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/hmj1026/dhpk/codex-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hmj1026/dhpk/codex-reviewer/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/agents/hmj1026/dhpk/codex-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hmj1026/dhpk/codex-reviewer.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 | $0.00026 | $0.00129 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00052 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00026 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00013 |
Grade A, and why
codex-reviewer 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Codex Reviewer
This is an internal read-only role for existing Claude and Cursor orchestrator
callers of the shared CLI runner. It is not published as a native Codex agent,
skill, or command until the codex-native-read-only-reviewer capability is
verified; native routes must report UNAVAILABLE when that capability is absent.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 15 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A 906309c8252f
codex-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository hmj1026/dhpk (2 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 129 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 agents, from other repositories
data-model-reviewer
A critical review agent for checking a database design before tables, migrations, or access rules are implemented.
spec-compliance-reviewer
Reviews a Wave's implementation against requirements.md and tasks.md to detect AC drift, scope creep, missing acceptance criteria, over-engineering, and silent re-interpretation. Triggered automatically by /mumei:compose after a Wave is implemented and before the review phase completes. Does NOT review code quality…
adversarial-reviewer
Plays "what could go wrong" against a Wave's diff. Surfaces race conditions, edge cases, silent failures, and operability gaps that other reviewers miss. Triggered LAST in the review pipeline (after spec-compliance and security have completed) so it can avoid duplicating their findings.
issue-validator
Re-validates a single finding produced by another reviewer with fresh context. Returns valid / invalid / unsure. Triggered by /mumei:compose after the 3 reviewers complete (spec-compliance / security / adversarial) — invoked once per finding in parallel for severity=HIGH/CRITICAL findings. Filters false positives…
security-reviewer
Reviews a Wave's diff for OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities introduced in this change. Triggered automatically by /mumei:compose after a Wave is implemented. Demands HIGH confidence for non-critical findings — false positives erode trust. Does NOT cover code quality, spec, or correctness.
design-reviewer
Reviews a draft design.md against the approved requirements.md. Detects coverage gaps (ACs without a corresponding design element), missing architectural artifacts (no diagram, no Components, no Trade-offs), and Wave Plan defects (granularity unfit for tasks decomposition). Triggered automatically by /mumei:compose…