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/DropFan/claude-code-pluginsWrote 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/dropfan/claude-code-plugins/codex-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/dropfan/claude-code-plugins/codex-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/dropfan/claude-code-plugins/codex-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/dropfan/claude-code-plugins/codex-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/dropfan/claude-code-plugins/codex-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 | $0.00016 | $0.02067 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00827 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00413 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00207 |
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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 173 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Context
- Working directory: !
pwd - Codex installed: !
codex --version 2>&1 || echo "NOT INSTALLED" - Current branch: !
git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null || echo "NOT A GIT REPO" - Uncommitted changes: !
git status --short 2>/dev/null | head -20
Task
Run Codex CLI code review with deep context enrichment and structured analysis.
User arguments: $ARGUMENTS
Pre-checks
- If Codex is not installed (version shows "NOT INSTALLED"), tell the user to install it with
npm install -g @openai/codexand configure withcodex login. Stop here. - If not in a git repo (branch shows "NOT A GIT REPO"), tell the user this command requires a git repository. Stop here.
- If uncommitted changes is empty AND ($ARGUMENTS is empty OR $ARGUMENTS is
uncommitted), tell the user there are no uncommitted changes and suggest specifying a branch or commit SHA (e.g.,/codex-bridge:codex-review main). Stop here.
Step 1: Determine Review Scope
Parse $ARGUMENTS to decide the review mode. When ambiguous, verify with git before deciding:
git branch --list "$ARGUMENTS" 2>/dev/null # non-empty → branch
git rev-parse --verify "$ARGUMENTS^{commit}" 2>/dev/null # success → valid commit
| $ARGUMENTS | Mode | Base Command |
|---|---|---|
Empty or uncommitted |
Uncommitted changes | codex review --uncommitted |
| Verified as a branch name | Branch diff | codex review --base $ARGUMENTS |
| Verified as a commit SHA | Single commit | codex review --commit $ARGUMENTS |
| Contains natural language | Guided review | codex review "<enriched prompt>" |
Important: Codex CLI does not allow
--uncommittedand[PROMPT]together. When providing custom instructions, pass them as the positional argument only — Codex defaults to reviewing uncommitted changes when no scope flag is given.
Step 2: Collect Deep Context
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 · 173 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 9fbdd5731616
codex-review is a command published in the GitHub repository DropFan/claude-code-plugins (8 stars, last pushed 26d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 2,067 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 commands, from other repositories
gh-review-fix-loop
Fix and resolve GitHub PR review threads.
elegant-code-review
Review the current working diff against the elegant-code decision ladder and propose deletions, honoring the negligence floor.
justify
Audit changes for additive bias, Iron Law compliance, and minimal intervention. Justifies every change against a "simplest safe change" standard.
git
The pre-finish status: branch, hygiene findings, message checks, workflow lint, template state.
guardian
Revisión de código IA como pre-commit hook — Guardian Angel.
pr-package
Prepare a GitHub PR delivery package (branch, commits, PR title and body, reviewer notes) from the real git diff against an explicit base branch, persisted as PRPACKAGE.md, never inventing work outside the diff. Use when scope is done and diff is stable. Do not use mid-implementation, for a branch name (use…