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 ching-kuo/claude-codex --skill execute-codexgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ching-kuo/claude-codexWrote 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/ching-kuo/claude-codex/execute-codex)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ching-kuo/claude-codex/execute-codex"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ching-kuo/claude-codex/execute-codex/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/ching-kuo/claude-codex/execute-codex"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ching-kuo/claude-codex/execute-codex.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 | $0.00073 | $0.02741 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00029 | $0.01096 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00548 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00274 |
Grade A, and why
execute-codex 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 — 204 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Execute-Codex — Smart Routing: Claude (small) / Codex (large)
Input
The user's message after the trigger is either:
- A file path to a plan (e.g.
.claude/plan/feature.md) — read it and extract task description, implementation steps, key files - A direct task description — use as-is
Confirm with user before proceeding if key context is missing.
Model Recommendation
Works with claude-sonnet-4-6 (default). No model override needed — routing handles complexity automatically.
Tool Requirements
Advisory checklist — ensure these tools are available:
AskUserQuestion— confirm missing contextmcp__codex__codexandmcp__codex__codex-reply— Codex implementation (Route B)Task— dispatch subagentsRead,Glob,Grep— context retrievalWrite,Edit— Claude implementation (Route A)Bash— run lint/tests/git commands
Core Protocols
- Code Sovereignty: Claude is the final authority — review and approve all changes before delivery
- Stop-Loss: Do not proceed to next phase until current phase output is validated
- Language: Use English when calling tools/models; communicate with user in their language
- Context Sanitization: Never pass
.env, secrets, tokens, API keys, or credentials to any external agent or MCP. Exclude files matching.env*,*secret*,*credential*,*.pem,*.key. Redact inline secrets before sending.
Execution Workflow
Phase 0: Read Plan
- If argument is a file path, read it and extract: task description, implementation steps, key files
- If no plan file, use the argument as the task description directly
- Confirm with user before proceeding if key context is missing
Phase 1: Context Retrieval
Read key files using Read, Glob, Grep. Confirm complete context before proceeding.
Phase 2: Route by Change Size
Classify the task before doing any implementation:
Small change — ALL of the following must be true:
- Touches ≤ 2 files
- Estimated diff ≤ 30 lines
- No new abstractions, modules, or significant logic (e.g. config edits, wording fixes, minor additions, single-function tweaks)
What ships with it
2 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 · 204 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A 668e3b15a639
execute-codex is a skill published in the GitHub repository ching-kuo/claude-codex (24 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 2,741 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 2026-08-30.
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"…
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…
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…
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…