review-fix-signoff-loop

review-fix-signoff-loop is a skill for Codex from AgentWorkforce/relay. It costs 77 tokens per session (1,761 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A review-and-repair workflow for coding-agent tasks that requires independent agents, usually Claude and Codex, to review the work from fresh context and agree before signoff.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it for high-stakes implementation, cross-repository changes, package releases, or any task needing documented scope, repeated fixes, and independent approval.
Why use it?
It reduces the chance that one review misses an incomplete connection, broken requirement, or failed validation step. The workflow keeps repairing and checking until the required reviewers agree.

Skill for Codex

Written for Codex: runs codex exec. Also seen: installed under .agents/ (shared by several agents); mentions Codex.

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 skills/agentworkforce/relay/review-fix-signoff-loop
Any agent
npx skills add AgentWorkforce/relay --skill review-fix-signoff-loop
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AgentWorkforce/relay

Made for: Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for review-fix-signoff-loop

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/agentworkforce/relay/review-fix-signoff-loop.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/agentworkforce/relay/review-fix-signoff-loop)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/agentworkforce/relay/review-fix-signoff-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/agentworkforce/relay/review-fix-signoff-loop.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 77 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,761 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 5.1 $0.00077 $0.01761
Opus 5 $0.00039 $0.00881
Sonnet 5 $0.00015 $0.00352
Haiku 4.5 $0.00008 $0.00176

Measured 6d ago against content hash a7db160ae30b, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-06, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

review-fix-signoff-loop 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 6d 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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:

.agents/skills/review-fix-signoff-loop/SKILL.md · 134 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 134 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Purpose

Use this pattern for high-stakes implementation workflows where a normal "implement, test, review once" flow is not enough. The workflow must keep repairing and re-reviewing until independent signoff agents agree the spec is fully wired end to end.

Pair this with writing-agent-relay-workflows for SDK syntax and relay-80-100-workflow for deterministic validation gates.

Required Shape

  • Run deterministic preflight before agents start.
  • Confirm repository root, required specs, declared write scope, credentials needed for PR comments, and whether commit/push/PR creation is in scope.
  • For cross-repo or package-release work, write a scope matrix before implementation: repositories, branches, PRs, packages, providers/features touched, published versions, consuming package manifests, lockfiles, and expected downstream bumps.
  • Probe the CLIs used by later agent steps. For Codex, codex login status is not enough; run a tiny codex exec --ephemeral --json --sandbox read-only -m <supported-model> prompt and fail early with a clear re-login instruction if it cannot return the expected token.
  • Write preflight evidence to .workflow-artifacts/<workflow>/iteration-N/preflight.md.
  • Implement with scoped owners.
  • Use Codex workers for code changes unless the codebase has a reason to prefer another CLI.
  • Split backend, frontend, desktop, tests, docs, or infrastructure into explicit non-overlapping ownership areas.
  • Each worker writes a durable summary artifact with changed files and commands run.
  • Reconcile before validation.
  • Add a deterministic implementation-reconcile gate that checks required files, expected API/UI/runtime surfaces, migrations, generated artifacts, and untracked files with git status --short -- <paths>.
  • For multi-provider changes, reconcile against the scope matrix: every touched provider/package must be classified as implemented, dependency-only, intentionally-deferred, or not-applicable, with proof. Do not let "we only bumped the package I remembered" pass this gate.
  • For package-release flows, reconcile producer and consumer state: npm view <pkg> version, package manifests, lockfile resolved tarballs/integrities, and npm ls <pkg> from every consuming workspace.
  • For CI failures, map each failing job to its exact local command or documented non-local equivalent. Distinguish similarly named gates (for example handler coverage vs acceptance route coverage) and replay the one that actually failed.
  • Use failOnError: false, then route the captured output to a repair owner.
  • Run repairable validation.
  • Use capture -> fix -> rerun for typecheck, targeted tests, integration or E2E tests, and regression checks.
  • Include exact failing CI commands when available before broader "nearby" checks. A nearby green gate is supporting evidence, not proof that the reported CI failure is fixed.
  • Red validation output is input for a repair agent, not an immediate workflow failure.
  • Write BLOCKED_NO_COMMIT.md only for true external blockers.
  • Run fresh-context signoff reviews.
  • Start a new workflow run, new agent names, or otherwise new agent contexts for each loop iteration.
  • Run Claude and Codex signoff reviews independently over the same post-validation repo state.
  • Reviewers must read specs, diff, validation logs, artifacts, and actual files.
  • Break only on dual signoff.
  • The loop may exit only when both reviewers write the exact satisfied verdict and final deterministic acceptance is green.
  • If either reviewer finds issues or is blocked, run a Codex fix pass and start a new fresh-context review iteration.
  • Make the Codex fix pass a non-interactive one-shot worker (preset: 'worker') with a file_exists verification for its durable report. Do not rely on interactive PTY idle detection or /exit for loop progress.
  • Report final signoff.
  • Write a final SIGNOFF.md that includes iteration count, validation evidence, Claude rationale, Codex rationale, remaining risks, and artifact paths.
  • Include the final scope matrix with every repository/package/provider row signed off, deferred with owner/date, or marked not applicable. For release flows, include published and consumed versions.
  • Post the same report to the PR. Resolve the PR from an explicit env var first, then from gh pr view.

Read the full file on GitHub · 134 lines

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. 6d ago First seen · 134 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A a7db160ae30b

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-fix-signoff-loop is a skill published in the GitHub repository AgentWorkforce/relay (812 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 1,761 once invoked, about $0.0004 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

cost-efficiency-analyzer

Analyzes cost structure, cost efficiency, and expense management from P&L data. Use when the user asks about costs, expenses, COGS, operating expenses, cost ratios, cost control, spending efficiency, margin compression from cost side, or wants to understand where money is going. Also use for "are we spending too…

awslabs/agentcore-samples · 98 tokens

multi-quarter-trend-analysis

Analyzes financial trends across multiple quarters by comparing P&L metrics over time. Use when the user wants to see trends, patterns, trajectories, or directional movement across 3 or more quarters. Also use for "how are we trending", "show me the trend", "track performance over time", "quarter over quarter…

awslabs/agentcore-samples · 82 tokens

babysit

Same-session monitoring loop for PRs, CI runs, tickets, and deployments using the monitorstart / monitorupdate / autonudgestop MCP tools. The loop re-injects your check instructions into THIS session on an idle interval — same context, same tools — and works from dashboard chat, Slack threads, and Discord DMs. Use…

kirodotdev/KiroCrew · 137 tokens

sector-rotation

Identify which market sectors to overweight or underweight based on current macro conditions and sector performance data.

awslabs/agentcore-samples · 22 tokens

trend-analysis

Analyze price and volume trends for one or more stocks to determine momentum direction and key technical levels.

awslabs/agentcore-samples · 21 tokens

computer-use

Read and drive native desktop applications through the accessibility layer — list on-screen apps, snapshot one window as a numbered element tree, then click / type / set a value / scroll / drag / run a named action, by element index or by screen coordinates. Use for work in a desktop app rather than a web page. Full…

kirodotdev/KiroCrew · 105 tokens