Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Jerrylalala/compound-engineering. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Jerrylalala/compound-engineering/main/.codex/skills/workflows-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Jerrylalala/compound-engineeringWrote 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/jerrylalala/compound-engineering/workflows-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jerrylalala/compound-engineering/workflows-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jerrylalala/compound-engineering/workflows-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/jerrylalala/compound-engineering/workflows-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jerrylalala/compound-engineering/workflows-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 | $0.00026 | $0.00771 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00308 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00154 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00077 |
Grade A, and why
workflows-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.
What it actually says
workflows-review
用于在 Codex 中做审查，而不是执行实现。
这是 Codex 中的 review 主入口。目标不是简单写几条意见，而是做出可信、可排序、可继续处理的结构化审查。
适用对象
- 当前分支改动
- 指定 PR / 分支
- 指定 plan 文档
输出原则
- findings first
- 按严重性排序
- 明确区分已验证问题与假设
- 尽量给出文件引用
审查步骤
- 明确审查目标：
- 当前分支
- 指定 PR / 分支
- plan 文档
- 查看 diff、相关文件和上下文。
- 从这些角度审查：
- 正确性
- 风险与回归
- 复杂度
- 性能
- 安全
- 与现有模式的一致性
- 如果是 plan 审查，还要检查：
- 是否可执行
- 是否原子化
- 是否缺少验证步骤
- 是否缺少关键风险说明
高价值能力
1. 多角度审查
至少从这些角度扫描：
- 正确性
- 风险与回归
- 架构一致性
- 性能
- 安全
- 简化空间
如果范围较大，可以显式调用相关专长技能或子代理，但最终必须统一整合成一份 review 结果。
2. Findings 优先
默认以 findings 开头，而不是先写总结。
每条 finding 尽量包含：
- 严重性
- 问题描述
- 影响
- 文件或位置
- 为什么这是真问题
3. 保护工件
不得建议删除：
docs/plans/*.mddocs/solutions/*.md
如果某个审查思路会导向“这些文档应删除”，要主动丢弃该建议。
4. Plan 审查专用检查
如果目标是 plan，还要检查：
- 是否能交给 Claude 执行
- 是否缺少 checkbox
- 是否缺少
## Overview - 是否缺少
Goal / Tech Stack - 是否把任务写得过大
- 是否缺少具体验证
5. 输出可信度
不要把猜测写成结论。
如果某点只是怀疑，明确写成：
- assumption
- open question
- residual risk
输出格式
优先输出：
## Findings
1. [severity] 问题描述
2. ...
然后可选输出：
- open questions
- residual risks
- next step
如果没有明确问题，也要明确写：
- no material findings
并补充剩余风险或验证盲区。
约束
- 不要把
docs/plans/*.md或docs/solutions/*.md当成应删除文件 - 不要自动进入执行阶段
- 审查结束后，如果用户要继续实现，提醒其回到 Claude 或继续人工决策
- 不要把低把握度推断包装成高置信结论
完成后的引导
完成后告诉用户：
- 主要 findings
- 是否建议修改 plan / code
- 如果下一步是执行，应回到 Claude
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 · 139 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A 20756bd30152
workflows-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Jerrylalala/compound-engineering (6 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 771 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
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"…
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…
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…
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…