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/leejuoh/claude-code-zero/codex-verifynpx skills add LeeJuOh/claude-code-zero --skill codex-verifygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LeeJuOh/claude-code-zeroWhat 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 | $0.00042 | $0.03502 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00021 | $0.01751 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00700 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00350 |
Grade A, and why
codex-verify scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 363 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Codex Document Verification + Double-Check
You are a translator + executor + double-checker. The user wants an independent review of a plan or document. Your job is to hand the document to Codex without ever loading it into your own context, so your follow-up evaluation is genuinely independent.
For code review use /codex-review. For research use /codex-research.
Execution Contract
This contract overrides default exploration habits. Read it before Phase 1.
| Phase | Allowed | Forbidden |
|---|---|---|
| 1 ANALYZE | test -f/-s, wc -l/-c, file, echo, printf, cat "$DOC" >> "$PROMPT_FILE" (file-redirect, no stdout) |
cat "$DOC" to stdout, head, tail, Read, Grep, Glob |
| 2 INVOKE | Bash for companion launch via stdin pipe | All source / document reads to stdout |
| 3 WAIT | status --wait loop (≤6 iterations, ≤24 min) |
All reads, manual polling, ps/kill |
| 4 DOUBLE-CHECK | Read the document (now — not before) to verify Codex's findings | n/a |
| 5 REPORT + SAVE | Write report file | n/a |
Why the document stays out of context in Phase 1-3: if you read the
document upfront, you form opinions before seeing Codex's. The
double-check is then biased — you'll rationalize away valid catches.
The blind-payload pattern (cat "$DOC" >> "$PROMPT_FILE") redirects to
a file, not stdout, so your context stays clean.
Unknown flags silently become task prompt content
(readTaskPrompt :613-619). Phase 1 is the only safety net.
Phase 1: Analyze + assemble blind payload
Parse $ARGUMENTS
Whitelist for this skill: --model <slug>, --effort <level> (skill-level, route through apply-codex-config.py — never reach the companion). The document path is another skill input, not a companion flag.
Rules:
- A single path → treat as the document to verify.
resume [follow-up]→ pass--resume-lastto the companion; the follow-up becomes the new prompt body.- Multiple paths →
AskUserQuestionwhich one. - Meta-instructions addressed to YOU (e.g. "evaluate in Korean", "be strict" — often typed in the user's own language) → obey for your own behavior, never include in the prompt.
- No args →
AskUserQuestion: "What document should I verify?" - Unknown flags (e.g.,
--base,--write,--foo) →AskUserQuestion. verify has no companion flags to forward.--model/--effortare skill-level and route throughapply-codex-config.py. --no-preview→ skip Phase 1.5 draft review. Power users who trust the translation.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 363 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A de3ccfba0c34
codex-verify is a skill published in the GitHub repository LeeJuOh/claude-code-zero (51 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 3,502 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
babysit-pr
Babysit a GitHub pull request after creation by continuously polling review comments, CI checks/workflow runs, and mergeability state until the PR is merged/closed or user help is required. Diagnose failures, retry likely flaky failures up to 3 times, auto-fix/push branch-related issues when appropriate, and keep…
imagegen
Generate or edit raster images when the task benefits from AI-created bitmap visuals such as photos, illustrations, textures, sprites, mockups, or transparent-background cutouts. Use when Codex should create a brand-new image, transform an existing image, or derive visual variants from references, and the output…
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
next-cache-components-optimizer
Drive a Next.js route to instant navigation by setting up an agentic loop, under Cache Components / PPR, on initial load (hard navigation) and client-side navigation (soft navigation). Encode the goal as a failing @next/playwright instant() e2e and work it to green, one verified route at a time; the shipped test then…