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 jaansokk/cursor_tools --skill codex-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jaansokk/cursor_toolsWrote 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/jaansokk/cursor_tools/codex-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jaansokk/cursor_tools/codex-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jaansokk/cursor_tools/codex-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/jaansokk/cursor_tools/codex-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jaansokk/cursor_tools/codex-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 | $0.00050 | $0.00724 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00290 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00145 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
codex-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 — 95 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Codex Review
When to use this skill
Use this whenever the user asks to:
- Review local changes, staged changes, or a commit range
- Review a branch or pull request with Codex CLI
- Run a second-opinion review focused on correctness and risk
Default model
- Default to
gpt-5.3-codex. - Baseline command:
codex -m gpt-5.3-codex
- Current docs recommend
gpt-5.3-codexas the default coding model. - A separate
gpt-5.3-codex-highslug is not documented in the public model list. - If the user explicitly wants to try a high-reasoning alias anyway, attempt it once and fall back to
gpt-5.3-codexif unavailable.
Review workflow
- Scope the review target first:
- working tree (
git diff) - staged only (
git diff --staged) - commit range (
git diff <base>...<head>)
- working tree (
- Gather context:
git status --shortgit log --oneline -n 20- relevant diff output
- Ask Codex for a risk-focused review (not a style nit pass).
- Return findings ordered by severity, with concrete file/symbol references and suggested fixes.
- Always call out test gaps and regression risk if coverage is unclear.
Command templates
A) Review current local changes (interactive)
codex -m gpt-5.3-codex "Review the current repository changes.
Focus on correctness bugs, behavioral regressions, security issues, and missing tests.
Ignore low-value style nits.
Return findings ordered by severity with file paths and concise fix suggestions."
B) Review staged diff (non-interactive)
codex -m gpt-5.3-codex -q "$(cat <<'EOF'
Review the staged git diff in this repository.
Prioritize:
1) correctness and logic flaws,
2) behavioral regressions,
3) security concerns,
4) missing/weak tests.
Output format:
- Severity: Critical/High/Medium/Low
- File: path
- Issue: short title
- Why it matters
- Suggested fix
EOF
)"
C) Optional model override with fallback
MODEL="gpt-5.3-codex-high"
codex -m "$MODEL" -q "Review current changes for bugs, regressions, security, and missing tests." \
|| codex -m gpt-5.3-codex -q "Review current changes for bugs, regressions, security, and missing tests."
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 · 95 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A f491ffad6358
codex-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository jaansokk/cursor_tools (1 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 724 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
code-simplifier
Use after implementing features to simplify and refine code for clarity, consistency, and maintainability.
audit-code-review
Review a PR or diff for correctness, security, and maintainability. Use for a pull request, a named change set, or "review my changes". Repo-wide anti-patterns → audit-code-quality. Bulk transforms → audit-codemod-safety.
audit-codemod-safety
Read-only check that a codemod or bulk transform preserved behavior — compiling is not proof. Use when "did this codemod break anything", "audit this bulk refactor", or before merging a mass find-replace. SQL → plan-data-integrity.
audit-doctrine
Read-only audit of custom lint and ratchet rules: is each rule right on the merits, not just enforced. Use when "is this lint rule wrong", "the ratchet banned a legitimate pattern", or "audit our guardrail doctrine". Enforcement → audit-gate-logic.
enhance-arch-boundaries
Enforce architecture boundaries in CI with dependency-cruiser or eslint-boundaries: layer direction, feature isolation, forbidden imports. Use when "enforce module boundaries" or "stop spaghetti imports". Advice only → audit-backend-architecture.
review
Code review checklist — catch bugs, security issues, and design problems before merging.