Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mturac/everything-openai-codexnpx agentmods add commands/mturac/everything-openai-codex/harness-auditWrote 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/mturac/everything-openai-codex/harness-audit)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/mturac/everything-openai-codex/harness-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/mturac/everything-openai-codex/harness-audit/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/mturac/everything-openai-codex/harness-audit"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/mturac/everything-openai-codex/harness-audit.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 | $0.00013 | $0.00600 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00240 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00120 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00060 |
Grade A, and why
harness-audit 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.
This is a copy
83% identical to harness-audit — 14 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 78 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Harness Audit Command
Run a deterministic repository harness audit and return a prioritized scorecard.
Usage
/harness-audit [scope] [--format text|json] [--root path]
scope(optional):repo(default),hooks,skills,commands,agents--format: output style (textdefault,jsonfor automation)--root: audit a specific path instead of the current working directory
Deterministic Engine
Always run:
node scripts/harness-audit.js <scope> --format <text|json> [--root <path>]
This script is the source of truth for scoring and checks. Do not invent additional dimensions or ad-hoc points.
Rubric version: 2026-03-30.
The script computes 7 fixed categories (0-10 normalized each):
- Tool Coverage
- Context Efficiency
- Quality Gates
- Memory Persistence
- Eval Coverage
- Security Guardrails
- Cost Efficiency
Scores are derived from explicit file/rule checks and are reproducible for the same commit. The script audits the current working directory by default and auto-detects whether the target is the ecc repo itself or a consumer project using ecc.
Output Contract
Return:
overall_scoreout ofmax_score(70 forrepo; smaller for scoped audits)- Category scores and concrete findings
- Failed checks with exact file paths
- Top 3 actions from the deterministic output (
top_actions) - Suggested ecc skills to apply next
Checklist
- Use script output directly; do not rescore manually.
- If
--format jsonis requested, return the script JSON unchanged. - If text is requested, summarize failing checks and top actions.
- Include exact file paths from
checks[]andtop_actions[].
Example Result
Harness Audit (repo): 66/70
- Tool Coverage: 10/10 (10/10 pts)
- Context Efficiency: 9/10 (9/10 pts)
- Quality Gates: 10/10 (10/10 pts)
Top 3 Actions:
1) [Security Guardrails] Add prompt/tool preflight security guards in hooks/hooks.json. (hooks/hooks.json)
2) [Tool Coverage] Sync commands/harness-audit.md and .opencode/commands/harness-audit.md. (.opencode/commands/harness-audit.md)
3) [Eval Coverage] Increase automated test coverage across scripts/hooks/lib. (tests/)
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 · 78 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A ed8d0ce10161
harness-audit is a command published in the GitHub repository mturac/everything-openai-codex (86 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 600 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 83% identical to harness-audit, differing in 14 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
reqforge-greenkeeper
Diagnose and fix ReqForge repository release gate failures.
bug-fixer
Diagnose root cause and fix bugs through systematic debugging.
fix
Debug errors, trace root cause, write patch, verify tests pass.
issue:discover-by-prompt
Discover issues from user prompt with Gemini-planned iterative multi-agent exploration. Uses ACE semantic search for context gathering and supports cross-module comparison (e.g., frontend vs backend API contracts).
refactor-cycle
Tech debt discovery and self-iterating refactoring with multi-dimensional analysis, prioritized execution, regression validation, and reflection-driven adjustment.
issue:discover
Discover potential issues from multiple perspectives (bug, UX, test, quality, security, performance, maintainability, best-practices) using CLI explore. Supports Exa external research for security and best-practices perspectives.