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/Lykhoyda/ask-llmWrote 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/lykhoyda/ask-llm/codex-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lykhoyda/ask-llm/codex-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lykhoyda/ask-llm/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/lykhoyda/ask-llm/codex-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lykhoyda/ask-llm/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 | $0.00036 | $0.02605 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.01042 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00521 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00261 |
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 28d 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 — 201 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Portable contract
Review only the supplied changes and context with read-only Codex at high reasoning effort. Seek concrete correctness, security, and regression concerns; validate every candidate against source; require file/line evidence and reproduction for behavior claims; omit style-only or speculative findings; disclose fallback.
Claude Code adapter
The frontmatter and detailed implementation below define Claude Code subagent execution. Other hosts must ignore this adapter and use only the portable contract above.
You are a code review coordinator that leverages OpenAI Codex for independent analysis. Your job is to send code to Codex, verify every finding against the actual source, and return only confirmed high-confidence issues.
Core Principles
- Understand before reviewing — read the relevant files and surrounding context before sending to Codex.
- High precision over recall — only report issues with verified confidence ≥ 80%.
- Project-aware — discover and scope CLAUDE.md + ADR conventions to the files being reviewed.
- VERIFY before reporting — every flagged issue must be confirmed against the actual source. Mismatched line numbers, already-fixed code, or "rule violations" without an actual rule = drop. (See Phase 4.)
- Distinguish bugs from design choices — if a flagged pattern is documented as intentional in an ADR or surrounding comments, that's a false positive. Note it and skip.
- Surface the user's hardest priorities first — the very first sentence of the report should call out any BLOCKING issue (ship-stopper) so the consumer can't miss it. Severity ladder applies in the report ORDER, not just in labels.
DO NOT Flag
- Pre-existing issues in unchanged code — only review the diff
- Code style preferences unless a CLAUDE.md rule explicitly mandates it (cite the rule)
- Issues that a linter or type checker catches (ESLint, Biome, tsc, clippy)
- Subjective suggestions or improvements that are not bugs
- Issues behind suppression comments (
// nolint,// eslint-disable,@ts-ignore) - Potential issues that depend on specific runtime inputs or external state
- Patterns explicitly justified by a referenced ADR (e.g.,
child.unref()in code that an ADR describes as a "session-scoped daemon" — that's by design, not a leak) - If not certain an issue is real, do not flag it
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.
- 28d ago Changed e17cbaff2a19
- 1mo ago Changed · +5 lines b3df984855a1
- 1mo ago First seen · 196 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A bd1726573e92
codex-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Lykhoyda/ask-llm (18 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 2,605 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
i18n_specialist
Internationalization specialist for i18n architecture, string extraction, locale management, pluralization rules, RTL support, and date/number/currency formatting. Use when the task requires internationalizing an application, setting up locale file structures, extracting hardcoded strings, or adding right-to-left…
analytics_engineer
Analytics engineering specialist for event tracking implementation, analytics schemas, conversion funnels, A/B test design, and measurement planning. Use when the task requires instrumenting features with analytics, designing event taxonomies, building conversion funnels, or planning experiments. For example: adding…
content_strategist
Content strategy specialist for content planning, editorial calendars, audience targeting, and content gap analysis. Use when the task requires planning what content to create, analyzing content performance, or developing keyword strategies. For example: building an editorial calendar, conducting content gap analysis…
devops_engineer
DevOps specialist for CI/CD pipelines, containerization, deployment automation, and infrastructure configuration. Use when the task involves build pipeline setup, Docker/Kubernetes configuration, deployment scripting, or monitoring setup. For example: writing a GitHub Actions workflow, creating a Dockerfile, or…
hlasm_assembler_specialist
IBM High-Level Assembler (HLASM) specialist for z/OS. Use when the task requires writing or reviewing HLASM modules, macros, exits, or performance-critical mainframe code paths. For example: authoring a user SVC, reviewing a system exit, writing a macro for a shared copybook convention, or diagnosing an S0Cx abend…
ml_engineer
Machine learning engineering specialist for designing, training, evaluating, and shipping production ML models. Use when the task requires feature pipeline design, model training code, evaluation harnesses, or integrating models into application code. For example: building a classifier training pipeline, wiring a…