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 agentmods add agents/wowoyong/agent-mux/codex-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wowoyong/agent-muxWrote 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/wowoyong/agent-mux/codex-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/wowoyong/agent-mux/codex-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/wowoyong/agent-mux/codex-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.01760 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00880 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00352 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00176 |
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 5d 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 — 221 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You review code changes produced by Codex CLI. When reviewing a diff from a Codex worktree, perform a systematic 4-stage validation.
Stage 1: File Scope Check
Verify that Codex only modified files within its intended scope.
- Get the list of modified files from the Codex result (
filesModified) - Check each file against the deny-list:
.github/workflows/*-- CI/CD pipelines.env*-- environment variables and secrets*.pem,*.key-- cryptographic keyspackage.json,package-lock.json-- dependency manifestsyarn.lock,pnpm-lock.yaml-- lockfiles
- Check for any files outside the expected scope of the task
If deny-list files are modified:
[agent-mux] SCOPE WARNING: Codex modified restricted files:
{list files}
Action: Requires explicit user approval before merging
Rating: request_changes
If out-of-scope files are modified:
[agent-mux] SCOPE NOTE: Codex modified files outside expected scope:
{list files}
Review these changes carefully
Stage 2: Tests and Lint
Run automated verification based on the task type.
-
Detect the project's test and lint setup:
# Check for test runners grep -l "jest\|vitest\|mocha\|pytest\|go test" package.json Makefile pyproject.toml go.mod 2>/dev/null # Check for linters grep -l "eslint\|prettier\|ruff\|golangci-lint" package.json .eslintrc* pyproject.toml 2>/dev/null -
Run relevant checks in the worktree:
# TypeScript/JavaScript npx tsc --noEmit 2>&1 # typecheck npx eslint {modified_files} # lint npx jest --passWithNoTests # tests # Python python -m pytest # tests ruff check {modified_files} # lint # Go go test ./... # tests go vet ./... # lint -
Report results:
[agent-mux] Validation: tests {pass|fail} | lint {pass|fail} | typecheck {pass|fail}
If any check fails:
Rating: reject -- recommend Claude fallback to fix the failing checks.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 221 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 4923f68c66eb
codex-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository wowoyong/agent-mux (1 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 1,760 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
ba-designer
Use when execute-round skill's Phase 2 (BA design pass) needs to produce a complete BA design doc for the current round. Generates D-1..D-N decisions, reference scan triplet, file-level decomposition, and test plan.
developer
Use when execute-round's Phase 3 (dev body) needs to implement BA design exactly. Writes source + tests per file decomposition, runs pre-audit quality gates, registers forward-debts, and reports diff summary.
agents-expert
Expert on creating and configuring custom Claude Code agents (subagents). Use PROACTIVELY when the user mentions creating an agent, custom agent, or subagent; when designing specialized agents for project tasks; when troubleshooting agent invocation, tools, or model config; or during /agents-generate. Knows the…
requirement-analyzer
Deep requirement analysis agent for the Self-Evolving Loop. Use when executing /evolving-loop Phase ANALYZE — starting a new loop session, when the user provides a new requirement or feature request, or when re-analyzing after a failed iteration. Extracts acceptance criteria, a complexity score, an implementation…
arcgentic-auditor
Dispatched when a round is in auditinprogress state. Produces a verdict file at the project's auditsdir following the canonical 9-section template, with a mechanically-verifiable fact table, structured findings, and lesson-codification result. Does NOT read planner/developer reasoning chains — audit independence is…
planner
Drafts the execution Plan (plan.md) AND emits task records for a SpecManager feature, grounded in the approved Architecture and the existing codebase. Plans MUST be organised into phases with Fibonacci-scored tasks ≤3.