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 commands/dr-code/tessera/codex-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dr-code/tesseraWhat 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 | $0.00021 | $0.00555 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00278 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00111 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00056 |
Grade A, and why
codex-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 yesterday.
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-review — Independent GPT Code Review
Scope: $ARGUMENTS
Get an independent GPT code review via Codex CLI. Claude evaluates each GPT finding (confirm, correct, or dismiss), adds severity, and presents a structured actionable review.
Phase 0: Determine Scope
- No args →
git diff --staged. If nothing staged →git diff HEAD~1 HEAD~Npattern →git diff HEAD~N- File args → read the specified files directly
- Nothing found → ask the user what to review
Phase 1: Get Context
If tessera MCP is active:
- Call
graph_continuewith the names of modified files as the query - Call
graph_impact(changed_files=[...])to show the blast radius — which parts of the codebase depend on what's being changed - Include the impact summary in the review prompt
Phase 2: Send to GPT
For diffs up to ~200 lines, send in one call. For larger diffs, send one file at a time.
codex exec "Independent code review. Context: $ARGUMENTS. Code/diff to review: <CODE_OR_DIFF>. Review for: (1) bugs and logic errors, (2) security vulnerabilities (injection, auth bypass, data exposure), (3) performance issues, (4) missing error handling, (5) readability and naming. Format each finding as: [BUG|SECURITY|PERF|STYLE|MISSING]: file:line — issue — suggested fix. End with VERDICT: approved | approved-with-notes | needs_revision"
Phase 3: Claude Evaluates
For each GPT finding:
- Confirm the finding is real (not a false positive)
- Assign severity: CRITICAL / HIGH / MED / LOW
- Note if the issue is already handled elsewhere (check via
graph_retrieveif tessera is active) - Add any findings GPT missed
Phase 4: Present Review
Verdict: approved | approved-with-notes | needs_revision
CRITICAL / HIGH — Must Fix: [list with file:line and fix]
MED — Should Fix: [list]
LOW / Style — Consider: [list]
Blast Radius: [if tessera active — what this change affects downstream]
Ask: fix critical/high issues now?
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.
- yesterday First seen · 60 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 811c80264125
codex-review is a command published in the GitHub repository dr-code/tessera (1 stars, last pushed 21d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 555 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 commands, from other repositories
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.