adversarial-review

A read-only command for asking Codex to challenge a proposed design or implementation approach. It focuses on counterarguments and risks rather than only checking changed lines.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to stress-test a design or code-review approach, passing options such as the base revision, scope, waiting mode, or background execution.
Why use it?
It provides a skeptical second opinion without modifying the project.

Command

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/greenpolo/cc-multi-cli-plugin/adversarial-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/greenpolo/cc-multi-cli-plugin
Per session 22 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 301 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00022 $0.00301
Opus 5 $0.00011 $0.00151
Sonnet 5 $0.00004 $0.00060
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00030

Measured 3d ago against content hash ab24bf617076, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

adversarial-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 3d 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.

plugins/codex/commands/adversarial-review.md · 22 lines

What it actually says

Run Codex as a skeptical reviewer with exactly one Bash call:

node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/multi-cli-companion.mjs" adversarial-review $ARGUMENTS 2>&1

Codex stress-tests the design decision, looks for the strongest counter-argument, and surfaces risks rather than rubber-stamping. Read-only — it never edits files. Use this when you want the approach challenged, not just a line-by-line diff review.

Execution:

  • Pass --wait/--background/--base/--scope through verbatim; remaining text is the focus and goes through unchanged. Never pass --write.
  • Small diffs: run in the foreground. Large or unclear scope: run the same call with run_in_background: true and report the review when it finishes.
  • Do not review the code yourself, read files, or summarize. Return the companion's stdout verbatim.
  • If the Bash call fails or returns nothing, your entire response is one line: Codex adversarial review failed: <one-line reason>.
Changes

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.

  1. 3d ago First seen · 22 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A ab24bf617076

Subscribe to this mod's changes

adversarial-review is a command published in the GitHub repository greenpolo/cc-multi-cli-plugin (89 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 301 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 2026-08-30.