Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add DmitriyYukhanov/claude-plugins/plugin install codex-collaborationWrote 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/dmitriyyukhanov/claude-plugins/cross-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dmitriyyukhanov/claude-plugins/cross-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dmitriyyukhanov/claude-plugins/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/dmitriyyukhanov/claude-plugins/cross-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dmitriyyukhanov/claude-plugins/cross-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 | $0.00055 | $0.07864 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.03932 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.01573 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00786 |
Grade A, and why
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 10d 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 — 509 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Cross-Review: Parallel Dual Review
Overview
Parallel review workflow between Claude and Codex CLI. Both models review the same artifact simultaneously and independently, then findings go through a three-stage resolution pipeline: initial triage → cross-validation (each model verifies the other's findings) → evidence-based research (documentation/code inspection for remaining disputes). Only genuinely inconclusive disagreements reach the user. Repeats until clean or max rounds reached. Auto-apply is the default; the user is consulted only for needs-decision items where evidence couldn't break a tie.
Core principle: Two independent perspectives are stronger than one. Neither model sees the other's review until triage. Disagreements are resolved by evidence first (cross-validation, then documentation/code research) — the user is only asked to decide when evidence is genuinely inconclusive. Confirmed findings are applied automatically; the user is consulted only for genuinely inconclusive disagreements.
Trigger Phrases
"cross-review", "dual review", "multi-model review", "get a second opinion", "validate with another model", "review with codex", "parallel review"
Invocation
cross-review [--max-rounds N] [--type code|plan|architecture|design] [target files...]
| Argument | Default | Description |
|---|---|---|
--max-rounds |
3 |
Maximum review-fix iteration rounds |
--type |
(auto-detected) | Artifact type override |
| target files | (branch diff) | Specific files to review |
Step 1: Preflight
Read ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/shared/prerequisites.md and execute the preflight check.
Invoke /codex:setup via the Skill tool. Two failure modes:
- Command not recognized (plugin not installed) -- print install instructions from prerequisites and ABORT. Do not continue to Step 2.
- Setup reports failure (CLI missing, auth expired) -- report the specific error from
/codex:setupand ABORT.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 10d ago First seen · 509 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A a1fcbf7ec04a
cross-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository DmitriyYukhanov/claude-plugins (7 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 7,864 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
code-standards
Prabhdeep (Sonu) Singh's personal coding standards — the house rules and quality bar for how code gets written. INVOKE before writing, generating, refactoring, or reviewing ANY code in ANY language — schemas, endpoints, queries, logging, validation, error handling — even when nobody says "standards" or "style".…
self-review
Surface the riskiest parts of the current diff so a reviewer knows where to look hardest — one inline pass on small diffs, one cold read on a cheaper model tier with in-session synthesis on substantial ones. INVOKE PROACTIVELY whenever a change is finished and about to be handed off, reviewed, or shipped. It points…
bug-finder
Hunt for one real, previously unreported defect and file it as a well-evidenced ticket — proactive discovery, not reactive diagnosis. INVOKE when asked to sweep code for bugs or hunt risky areas, and when /sonu:factory runs a bug-hunt pass. A known symptom is [[debugging]]; a pending diff is [[self-review]]. It files…
team-review
Review changed code for reuse, quality, and efficiency using a team of persistent named reviewers. This skill should be used when the user says "team review", "review with team", or wants parallel code review with persistent team members for follow-up questions. Similar to /subagent-review but reviewers persist after…
github-pr-review
Handles PR review comments and feedback resolution. Use when user wants to resolve PR comments, handle review feedback, fix review comments, address PR review, check review status, respond to reviewer, verify PR readiness, review PR comments, analyze review feedback, evaluate PR comments, assess review suggestions, or…
github-pr-creation
Creates GitHub Pull Requests with automated validation and task tracking. Use when user wants to create PR, open pull request, submit for review, or check if ready for PR. Analyzes commits, validates task completion, generates Conventional Commits title and description, suggests labels. NOTE - for merging existing…