Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to dengxu11111/dual-ai-paper-coach. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dengxu11111/dual-ai-paper-coach/main/.codex/prompts/review.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dengxu11111/dual-ai-paper-coachWrote 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/commands/dengxu11111/dual-ai-paper-coach/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/dengxu11111/dual-ai-paper-coach/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/dengxu11111/dual-ai-paper-coach/review/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/commands/dengxu11111/dual-ai-paper-coach/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/dengxu11111/dual-ai-paper-coach/review.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00818 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00327 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00164 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00082 |
Grade A, and why
review 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 2mo 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 — 64 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Codex 审稿模板(备用)
这份是直接在 Codex CLI 里跑的 prompt 模板。 正常流程是 Claude Code 通过
/codex-review自动调用;如果你想绕过 Claude 直接让 Codex 审,可以手动用这份 prompt。输出语言策略:审稿报告强制英文(与论文一致 + /iterate 命令依赖固定的 英文措辞模式做替换)。中文说明只用于人类阅读流程,不影响 AI 输出。
用法(手动 REPL)
⚠️ 务必在项目根目录(含
AGENTS.md的目录)启动codex,不要 cd 进my-paper/——否则路径会错。
# 在项目根目录(不是 my-paper/)执行
codex
进入 Codex REPL 后粘贴:
读以下文件并按照 reviewer_system.md 的格式产出结构化审稿报告:
AGENTS.md—— 你的工作守则prompts/reviewer_system.md—— 审稿系统准则prompts/review_paper.md—— 任务模板({manuscript} 替换为 draft.md 的内容)my-paper/draft.md—— 当前论文my-paper/data/analysis_results.json(如果存在)——数字核验来源
输出:
- 审稿报告写到
my-paper/review_round_<N>.md(N 是新的轮次号,看 my-paper/review_round_*.md 已存在的最大 N+1) - 不要修改任何其他文件
- 不要去看 prompts/writer_system.md(那会污染你的独立性判断)
- 如果
analysis_results.json存在,逐条核对论文里的定量数字;对不上或找不到的数字写成 Critical Issue - 如果
analysis_results.json不存在,明确写 "numerical verification was unavailable"
按 reviewer_system.md 的格式输出 Score / Summary / Critical / Important / Minor / Wording / Verdict。
用法(一次性 exec)
在项目根目录跑。
codex exec --skip-git-repo-check --sandbox workspace-write \
-c 'model_reasoning_effort="xhigh"' \
"Read AGENTS.md, prompts/reviewer_system.md, prompts/review_paper.md, my-paper/draft.md, and if present my-paper/data/analysis_results.json. The {manuscript} placeholder in review_paper.md should be replaced with draft.md content. If analysis_results.json is present, verify every quantitative manuscript claim against it and flag any mismatch or unverifiable number as a Critical Issue. If it is absent, state that numerical verification was unavailable. Produce a structured peer review per reviewer_system.md format. Write to my-paper/review_round_<N>.md. Do not modify other files."
关键参数(缺一就会卡):
--skip-git-repo-check— 避免 Codex 卡 git repo 检查--sandbox workspace-write— 必须,默认沙盒只读 Codex 写不进 review_round_N.md-c 'model_reasoning_effort="xhigh"'— 审稿要 xhigh,默认 medium 漏问题
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 64 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 2e415a5c8e24
review is a command published in the GitHub repository dengxu11111/dual-ai-paper-coach (12 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 818 tokens. 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.
review compared with commands from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| reviewdengxu11111/dual-ai-paper-coach | Command | 12 | 5mo ago | MIT | A | 0 | Codex |
| checklistgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| clarifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 27 | Claude Code |
| specifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| analyzegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 26 | Claude Code |
| convergegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 35 | Claude Code |
| implementgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 14 | Claude Code |