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 skills add Ancienttwo/repo-harness --skill repo-harness-cross-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Ancienttwo/repo-harnessWrote 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/skills/ancienttwo/repo-harness/repo-harness-cross-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ancienttwo/repo-harness/repo-harness-cross-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ancienttwo/repo-harness/repo-harness-cross-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/skills/ancienttwo/repo-harness/repo-harness-cross-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ancienttwo/repo-harness/repo-harness-cross-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00067 | $0.00480 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00240 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00096 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00048 |
Grade A, and why
repo-harness-cross-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 5d 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.
What it actually says
repo-harness-cross-review
Canonical rule owner for independent outside review. Scope capture, provider
invocation, timeout, structured-output validation, and error classification live in
code (src/core/review, src/effects/review,
src/cli/commands/cross-review.ts); this package owns only when to invoke,
how to interpret findings, and the boundaries below.
Mode Selection
- Inside Claude Code -> direct Codex:
references/codex-mode.md. - Inside Codex -> official
codex@openai-codexplugin app-server:references/codex-plugin-mode.md. - Explicit Claude acceptance review ->
references/claude-mode.md. - An explicit provider request wins over the host default.
When to use
- Before merging an important diff (last gate).
- After writing a spec/tests -- find ambiguity and weak assertions.
- A hard bug whose root cause is unclear (independent diagnosis).
Interpreting findings
- Present the transcript verbatim -- never summarize or soften it.
- Any
[P1]finding -> FAIL (do not merge until addressed). Only[P2]or none -> PASS. - Agreement raises confidence; divergence is where to dig. A recommendation, not a decision -- you decide.
Boundaries
- Read-only: direct Codex and the plugin app-server both use a read-only sandbox.
- Bounded: 2 provider attempts, then
SKIPPED-- advisory, non-blocking (exit 0). Do not re-run it or narrow the diff to retry.degraded_scopeandstale_scopeblock (exit 1). Never a synthesized pass. - Never produces or verifies a
merge-gatereceipt; that judge is separate.
What ships with it
3 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 5d ago Changed · -3 lines 0ebbef2c857a
- 6d ago Changed · +4 lines fe6d6d4daec1
- 12d ago First seen · 38 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A 9c5c66ead2ba
repo-harness-cross-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Ancienttwo/repo-harness (431 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 480 once invoked, about $0.0003 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
openlore-execute-refactor
Apply a confirmed .openlore/refactor-plan.md with a test gate after each change. Use when asked to execute or continue an OpenLore refactoring plan.
openlore-review-changes
Review code changes using OpenLore risk, call, coverage, and cluster evidence without editing code. Use when asked for a change review, pre-PR safety check, or merge recommendation.
openclaw-github-dedupe
Investigate a cluster of GitHub issues and PRs, determine canonical candidates, post duplicate/related status, preserve contributor credit, and execute cleanup actions. Supports autonomous mode for provided-link-only closeout, merge/fix follow-through, changelog, and post-merge issue/PR cleanup.
openclaw-pr-batch-sweep
Select, review, repair, validate, and land batches of up to 20 low-risk OpenClaw contributor pull requests using Vincent's maintainer preferences and bounded sub-agent lanes. Use for "next 20", broad contributor PR sweeps, merge-candidate mining, or continued PR-batch work where drafts, maintainer work, trivial…
semantic-slicing
Build local semantic review slices by combining clawpatch feature maps, deepsec threat candidates, visual review maps, and optional gitcrawl/discrawl evidence for repos such as openclaw/openclaw.
technical-deslop
Remove AI-style noise from staged and branch diffs while preserving behavior and repository style.