Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Chachamaru127/codex-harness. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Chachamaru127/codex-harness/main/.codex/skills/harness-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Chachamaru127/codex-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/chachamaru127/codex-harness/harness-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/chachamaru127/codex-harness/harness-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chachamaru127/codex-harness/harness-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/chachamaru127/codex-harness/harness-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chachamaru127/codex-harness/harness-review.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 | $0.00077 | $0.06424 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00031 | $0.02570 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.01285 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00642 |
Grade A, and why
harness-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 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 — 615 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Skills
コードレビュー、計画レビュー、スコープ分析を担当するスキル群です。 コンテキストからレビュータイプを自動判定します。
レビュータイプ（Context-Aware）
レビュータイプはコンテキストから自動判定されます：
| Recent Activity | Review Type | 4 Experts |
|---|---|---|
/plan-with-agent 後 |
Plan Review | Clarity, Feasibility, Dependencies, Acceptance |
/work 後 |
Code Review | Security, Performance, Quality, Accessibility |
| タスク追加後 | Scope Review | Scope-creep, Priority, Feasibility, Impact |
手動指定
/harness-review # 自動判定
/harness-review code # コードレビュー強制
/harness-review plan # 計画レビュー強制
/harness-review scope # スコープ分析強制
機能詳細（Code Review）
| 機能 | 詳細 |
|---|---|
| 変更レビュー | See references/changes-review.md |
| 品質チェック | See references/quality-review.md |
| セキュリティ | See references/security-review.md |
| パフォーマンス | See references/performance-review.md |
| アクセシビリティ | See references/accessibility-review.md |
| SEO/OGP | See references/seo-review.md |
| Codex 統合 | See references/codex-integration.md |
| コミット判定 | See references/commit-judgment-logic.md |
機能詳細（Plan/Scope Review）
Plan Review と Scope Review は Codex エキスパートを使用します：
| レビュータイプ | エキスパート | 参照 |
|---|---|---|
| Plan Review | Clarity, Feasibility, Dependencies, Acceptance | ../codex-review/references/experts/clarity-expert.md 等 |
| Scope Review | Scope-creep, Priority, Feasibility, Impact | ../codex-review/references/experts/scope-creep-expert.md 等 |
詳細: ../codex-review/references/codex-parallel-review.md
実行手順
- 品質判定ゲート（Step 0）
- 残コンテキスト確認（Codex モード時）（Step 1）
- ユーザーのリクエストを分類
- （Claude-mem 有効時）過去のレビュー指摘を検索
- 並列実行の判定（下記参照）
- 上記の「機能詳細」から適切な参照ファイルを読む、または並列サブエージェント起動
- 結果を統合してレビュー完了
What ships with it
11 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.
- CLAUDE.md 637 B
- references/accessibility-review.md 3.8 KB
- references/changes-review.md 4.2 KB
- references/CLAUDE.md 338 B
- references/codex-integration.md 5.1 KB
- references/commit-judgment-logic.md 4.5 KB
- references/determine-review-mode.md 3.2 KB
- references/performance-review.md 3.4 KB
- references/quality-review.md 5.9 KB
- references/security-review.md 8.6 KB
- references/seo-review.md 7.0 KB
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 · 615 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 93cb9c8d7503
harness-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Chachamaru127/codex-harness (2 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 6,424 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
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…