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 agentmods add skills/greenpolo/cc-multi-cli-plugin/codex-result-handlingnpx skills add greenpolo/cc-multi-cli-plugin --skill codex-result-handlinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/greenpolo/cc-multi-cli-pluginWhat 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 | $0.00018 | $0.00367 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00183 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00073 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00037 |
Grade A, and why
codex-result-handling 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 3d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to codex-result-handling — 2 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Codex Result Handling
When the helper returns Codex output:
- Preserve the helper's verdict, summary, findings, and next steps structure.
- For review output, present findings first and keep them ordered by severity.
- Use the file paths and line numbers exactly as the helper reports them.
- Preserve evidence boundaries. If Codex marked something as an inference, uncertainty, or follow-up question, keep that distinction.
- Preserve output sections when the prompt asked for them, such as observed facts, inferences, open questions, touched files, or next steps.
- If there are no findings, say that explicitly and keep the residual-risk note brief.
- If Codex made edits, say so explicitly and list the touched files when the helper provides them.
- For
codex:codex-rescue, do not turn a failed or incomplete Codex run into a Claude-side implementation attempt. Report the failure and stop. - For
codex:codex-rescue, if Codex was never successfully invoked, do not generate a substitute answer at all. - CRITICAL: After presenting review findings, STOP. Do not make any code changes. Do not fix any issues. You MUST explicitly ask the user which issues, if any, they want fixed before touching a single file. Auto-applying fixes from a review is strictly forbidden, even if the fix is obvious.
- If the helper reports malformed output or a failed Codex run, include the most actionable stderr lines and stop there instead of guessing.
- If the helper reports that setup or authentication is required, direct the user to
/multi:setupand do not improvise alternate auth flows.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 22 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 16a91b8aade7
codex-result-handling is a skill published in the GitHub repository greenpolo/cc-multi-cli-plugin (89 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 367 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to codex-result-handling, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
copilot-pr-review-loop
Drive a GitHub pull request through repeated rounds of Copilot code review until convergence. Use when the user asks to "request Copilot review", "run a Copilot review loop", iterate on Copilot feedback, or wants automated triage-and-respond on Copilot PR comments. Covers re-request mechanics, open-thread filtering…
upstream-sync
Periodically sync new commits from microsoft/terminal into this manually-forked intelligent-terminal repo by cherry-picking commit-by-commit onto a dated sync branch, auto-skipping revert pairs and empty commits, auto-resolving known take-upstream files, and stopping cleanly on genuine conflicts. The agent (you…
release-notes
Generate user-facing release notes for Intelligent Terminal. Use when asked to write release notes, changelog, what-is-new summary, or prepare a release. Compares git commits between releases, looks up PR-linked issues and community contributors, then outputs formatted notes with "Verbed + Impact + Scenario" style…
add-acp-agent-support
Add first-class support for an ACP-compatible agent CLI to Intelligent Terminal. Use when integrating a new built-in AI agent, ACP server command, authentication flow, model selection, interactive delegation, session hooks, onboarding, Settings, branding, GPO policy, documentation, tests, build, deployment, or live…
opentag
Use when installing, pairing, operating, or troubleshooting OpenTag through the published CLI, self-hosted Control Plane, governed completion, supported collaboration platforms, or built-in coding agents.
pr-integration-test
Design, implement, and validate Intelligent Terminal integration tests for a target pull request or regression. Use when asked to add PR integration tests, convert a bug fix into E2E coverage, prove existing behavior still works, map tests to the release checklist, or verify E2E reports mark checklist cases complete.