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 and3r817/dot-claude-plugins --skill codex-advisorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/and3r817/dot-claude-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/skills/and3r817/dot-claude-plugins/codex-advisor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/and3r817/dot-claude-plugins/codex-advisor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/and3r817/dot-claude-plugins/codex-advisor/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/and3r817/dot-claude-plugins/codex-advisor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/and3r817/dot-claude-plugins/codex-advisor.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 | $0.00085 | $0.02838 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.01135 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00568 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00284 |
Grade A, and why
codex-advisor 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 — 384 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Codex Advisor
Use this skill to consult Codex as a senior engineering advisor through two specialized collaboration modes: Chat for peer brainstorming and Consensus for structured evaluation. Invoke Codex strictly for advisory consultation—it provides analysis and recommendations while Claude handles all code implementation.
Collaboration Modes
Chat Mode — Peer brainstorming for exploring solutions, trade-offs, and validation. Use for iterative
problem-solving and technical discussions. See references/chat-pattern.md for detailed guidance.
Consensus Mode — Structured evaluation for major decisions. Provides 7-dimension assessment with verdict and
confidence scoring. Use for high-stakes architectural or technology decisions. See references/consensus-pattern.md for
detailed guidance.
When to Use This Skill
Invoke Codex for advisory consultation on architecture, design decisions, code review, technology selection, and strategic planning. Codex provides analysis and recommendations only—all code implementation uses Claude's tools directly.
Do not use for: Simple questions, actual code writing, or file modifications.
Collaboration Workflow
Step 1: Load Project Context (Always Do This First)
Before consulting Codex, gather project-specific context to ensure recommendations align with established constraints:
Required:
- Read
~/.claude/CLAUDE.mdfor global project principles and constraints - Extract key information:
- Core principles (e.g., "INVESTIGATE BEFORE CHANGING", "MINIMAL SURGICAL CHANGES")
- Forbidden patterns or practices
- Architecture constraints
- Code style requirements
- Security/quality standards
Optional:
- If project-specific
./AGENTS.mdexists in current directory, read it for additional context
Usage:
- Include extracted constraints in your prompt to Codex, OR
- Add them as context in the
developer-instructionsparameter
Example context to include:
Project constraints from CLAUDE.md:
- INVESTIGATE BEFORE CHANGING: debug systematically first
- MINIMAL SURGICAL CHANGES: change only what's requested
- FOLLOW EXISTING PATTERNS: match codebase conventions
- No placeholders or fallback implementations
What ships with it
5 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 384 lines · 85 tokens per session scan A fbafe35f3e30
codex-advisor is a skill published in the GitHub repository and3r817/dot-claude-plugins (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 85 tokens to every session and 2,838 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 skills, from other repositories
hardening-codebase
Audit and tighten codebase quality gates — architecture, lint, types, tests, docs, code review. Use when onboarding a project, before a release, or when validation is too permissive.
reviewing-cpp
Reviews C++ desktop code for memory safety, framework anti-patterns, build system issues, and thread safety. Use when reviewing C++ GUI code quality or when the user asks for code review.
reviewing-go
Provides concise, focused Go code reviews matching exact task complexity requirements. Use when reviewing Go code quality, concurrency safety, or when the user asks for code review.
reviewing-code
Provides concise, focused code reviews matching exact task complexity requirements. Use when reviewing code quality, security, or when the user asks for code review.
reviewing-rust
Provides concise, focused Rust code reviews matching exact task complexity requirements. Use when reviewing Rust code quality, safety, or when the user asks for code review.
reviewing-typescript
Provides concise, focused TypeScript/React code reviews matching exact task complexity requirements. Use when reviewing TypeScript code quality, type safety, or when the user asks for code review.