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 Rijul1204/rashedul-agentic-engineering --skill pair-agent-harnessgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Rijul1204/rashedul-agentic-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/rijul1204/rashedul-agentic-engineering/pair-agent-harness)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rijul1204/rashedul-agentic-engineering/pair-agent-harness"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rijul1204/rashedul-agentic-engineering/pair-agent-harness/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/rijul1204/rashedul-agentic-engineering/pair-agent-harness"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rijul1204/rashedul-agentic-engineering/pair-agent-harness.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 | $0.00242 | $0.03376 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00121 | $0.01688 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00048 | $0.00675 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00338 |
Grade A, and why
pair-agent-harness 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 9d 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 — 209 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Pair-Agent Harness
A coordination harness for two AI agents working in complementary roles on a shared markdown file. The two canonical roles are:
- Reviewer — critiques, challenges assumptions, asks pointed questions, ratifies decisions.
- Implementor — proposes designs, implements code changes, responds to critique, runs quality gates.
The roles swap per topic — when Claude opens the thread with findings + questions for Codex, Claude is the Implementor / Codex is the Reviewer. When Codex opens the thread asking for review of a Codex-generated patch, the roles flip. The harness doesn't pin roles; it pins the discipline: one agent appends at a time, each side reads the whole file before responding, the markdown thread is the single source of truth.
This decouples the two agents from each other's runtime: neither has to be online at the same time. The Implementor can land code changes between rounds; the Reviewer can take a day to think; the file persists across both sessions.
When to invoke
Fire on:
- User says "pair another agent on this", "harness Codex on this", "pair me with Codex on this design".
- User says "review this with Codex", "open a Codex review", "let's get Codex's take on this".
- User says "open a peer review", "get a second pair of eyes on this", "ping another Claude on this".
- User points at an existing
*-review-thread.md/*-dialogue-thread.mdand says "respond" / "continue" / "monitor". - User says "monitor this file" with a path that looks like a pair-agent thread.
Do NOT fire on:
- One-off code review by a single agent (use a normal code-review subagent instead).
- Synchronous chat or pair-programming (no file involved).
- Generic file-watching for build artifacts / logs (use the Monitor tool directly).
Step 1: Seed or locate the thread file
Default location, in order:
- If the cwd is inside a git repo, place under
<repo>/.dialogue/<topic>-review-thread.md. Create the.dialogue/directory if missing; add it to.gitignoreif the user prefers ephemeral threads, or commit it if the user wants the audit trail. - If a
project-management/,docs/design/, or similar design-docs folder already exists in the repo, prefer<that-folder>/<topic>-review-thread.md. - If outside any repo, use
~/.claude/review-threads/<topic>-review-thread.md.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 209 lines · 242 tokens per session scan A 788ca5d19ae5
pair-agent-harness is a skill published in the GitHub repository Rijul1204/rashedul-agentic-engineering (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 242 tokens to every session and 3,376 once invoked, about $0.0012 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
ios-app-agentic-engineering
End-to-end agentic engineering for iPhone apps, from idea to a secure App Store release through 8 gated phases. Use when someone wants to build, plan, or ship an iPhone/iOS app — especially a non-programmer ("vibe coder") asking to create an app, pick a tech stack (SwiftUI, React Native, Flutter), choose a backend…
stakeholder-communication
Communicate effectively with stakeholders across functions and seniority levels. Use this skill when writing status updates, preparing executive reviews, sharing technical decisions with non-technical audiences, managing up, communicating bad news, or designing the communication cadence for a project. Triggers on…
analytics-strategy
Design measurement frameworks including event taxonomy, KPI hierarchy, dashboard architecture, attribution models, and analytics implementation strategy. Use this skill whenever the user wants to plan analytics, design dashboards, build event taxonomies, define KPIs, set up tracking, or audit existing measurement.…
content-strategy
Develop a content strategy covering editorial positioning, content pillars, formats, calendar, governance, and topical authority planning. Use this skill whenever the user wants to plan a content program, define content pillars, build an editorial calendar, structure topic clusters, set up content governance, or align…
incident-response
Manage active production incidents through detection, triage, mitigation, communication, and resolution with structured roles and decision-making. Use this skill whenever the user has an active incident, a production issue, a service outage, a security incident, or needs to plan incident response procedures. Triggers…
agb-begriff-vorformuliert-305
Für AGB Begriff Vorformuliert 305: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt. Fachgebiet: AGB-Recht-Prüfer. Route: agb-begriff-vorformuliert-305.