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/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-meeting-summary-generatornpx skills add hoavdc/CodexKit --skill codexkit-meeting-summary-generatorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hoavdc/CodexKitWrote 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/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-meeting-summary-generator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-meeting-summary-generator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-meeting-summary-generator.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00041 | $0.00853 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00426 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00171 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
codexkit-meeting-summary-generator 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 4d 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 — 117 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Meeting Summary Generator
When to Use
- Turning a transcript, rough notes, or chat log into a meeting recap.
- Extracting decisions, action items, owners, due dates, and unresolved questions.
- Preparing a follow-up email or project tracker update after a meeting.
- Cleaning up a meeting where participants left with unclear next steps.
Procedure
Step 1 - Identify Meeting Context
Capture meeting title, date, attendees, purpose, and expected decision or outcome.
Step 2 - Extract Decisions
List only decisions that were actually made. If the notes imply a decision but do not confirm it, mark it as "proposed" or "needs confirmation."
Step 3 - Extract Actions
For each action item, identify:
- owner
- task
- due date or suggested date
- dependency
- source quote or note if useful
Step 4 - Surface Open Questions
Separate questions that block work from questions that are informational.
Step 5 - Draft Follow-up
Write a short recap suitable for email or Slack. Keep it factual and avoid attributing commitments without evidence.
Inputs
| Input | Required | Format |
|---|---|---|
| Notes or transcript | Yes | Text, bullets, transcript excerpt |
| Meeting purpose | Recommended | One sentence |
| Attendees | Recommended | Names and roles |
| Desired recap format | Optional | Email, Slack, project tracker |
Output
## Meeting Summary - [Meeting Name]
### Executive Recap
[3-5 sentences]
### Decisions
| Decision | Owner | Evidence / Note |
|----------|-------|-----------------|
### Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due Date | Dependency | Status |
|--------|-------|----------|------------|--------|
### Open Questions
| Question | Blocking? | Suggested Next Step |
|----------|-----------|---------------------|
### Follow-up Draft
[Ready-to-send recap]
Quality Criteria
- Decisions are separated from discussion points.
- Every action item has an owner or is marked "owner missing."
- Dates are preserved exactly when provided and marked as suggested when inferred.
- The recap is neutral, factual, and not inflated with generic language.
- Confidential or sensitive content is summarized carefully and flagged when needed.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 117 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A e0d7e735438a
codexkit-meeting-summary-generator is a skill published in the GitHub repository hoavdc/CodexKit (21 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 853 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
claude_code_delegation
Delegate coding, review, and refactor tasks to Claude Code CLI through Row-Bot's approval-gated shell workflow.
developer_review
Code-review workflow for Developer Studio repositories.
reducing-aigc-detection
Systematically reduce AIGC detection rates in academic papers (Chinese/English). Analyzes detection reports, identifies high-impact sections, applies multi-layer rewriting strategies preserving formatting/footnotes, and verifies results. Supports 维普/知网/Turnitin platforms.
architecting-security
安全架构与治理：威胁建模 (STRIDE/PASTA/LINDDUN)、零信任身份架构、IAM/SSO/MFA/PAM、合规框架 (SOC2/PCI/HIPAA/GDPR)、DLP、隐私工程、安全控制设计。Use when designing security architecture, threat modeling new systems, implementing zero-trust identity, designing IAM/SSO/PAM, building compliance evidence chains, or planning privacy-by-design.
defending-applications
Application security defense knowledge for builders. Covers Web/API/GraphQL hardening (XSS/SQLi/SSRF/IDOR/BOLA/Mass Assignment/deserialization/upload/path traversal), authentication/authorization (OAuth 2.0/OIDC/JWT/Session/Cookie/SAML/SSO), and LLM application security (prompt injection, jailbreak, RAG poisoning…
detecting-and-responding
蓝队与紫队工程：检测规则编写、SIEM/EDR 调优、事件响应、数字取证、威胁狩猎、ATT&CK 映射、紫队演练闭环。Use when writing Sigma/YARA detection rules, tuning SIEM noise, responding to security incidents, conducting forensic analysis, hunting threats, or running purple team exercises.