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 sd0xdev/sd0x-harness --skill issue-analyzegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sd0xdev/sd0x-harnessWrote 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/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/issue-analyze)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/issue-analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/issue-analyze/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/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/issue-analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/issue-analyze.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00073 | $0.03122 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00029 | $0.01249 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00624 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00312 |
Grade A, and why
issue-analyze 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 — 276 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Issue Analyze Skill
Trigger
- Keywords: analyze issue, investigate problem, problem analysis, root cause, root cause analysis, triage review, review thread analysis
Input Types
| Type | Source | Example |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub Issue | Issue number, URL, or description | /issue-analyze 123 |
| Review Thread | file:line + reviewer comment | /issue-analyze --triage "src/foo.ts:42 — Use early return" |
When input is a Review Thread:
- Phase 1 skips
gh issue view, uses provided thread data directly - Phase 2 classification uses Review Thread dimensions (see
references/classification.md)
Modes
| Mode | Input Type | Phases Executed | Use Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full (default) | Issue or Thread | 1 → 2 → 2.5 → 3 → 4 | Deep analysis with investigation |
Triage (--triage) |
Review Thread | 2 → 2.5 only | Lightweight classification + verdict (thread data provided inline) |
Triage (--triage) |
GitHub Issue | 1 → 2 → 2.5 | Fetch issue first, then classify + verdict |
When NOT to Use
- Known root cause, fix directly (use
/bug-fix) - Pure feature development (use
/feature-dev) - Only need code review (use
/codex-review)
Workflow
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Phase 1: Read Issue / Review Thread │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ GitHub Issue: gh issue view <number> --json ... │
│ Review Thread: use provided { path, line, reviewer, comment } │
│ Extract: symptoms, reproduction steps, error messages, files │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Phase 2: Problem Classification │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ GitHub Issue: Determine problem type → investigation strategy │
│ Review Thread: Determine category → actionability │
│ │
│ ┌────────────────┬──────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ Type │ Investigation Strategy │ │
│ ├────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────┤ │
│ │ Unfamiliar │ /code-explore │ │
│ │ Regression │ /git-investigate │ │
│ │ Complex root │ /code-investigate (dual view) │ │
│ │ Multiple cause │ /codex-brainstorm (exhaustive) │ │
│ │ Composite │ Combine multiple strategies │ │
│ └────────────────┴──────────────────────────────────┘ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Phase 2.5: Verdict Assessment (NEW) │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Codex blind verification: ACTIONABLE / NON_ACTIONABLE / UNCERTAIN│
│ Fresh exec thread (§ Start), anti-anchoring │
│ Pattern: @skills/seek-verdict/references/verdict-prompt.md │
│ Thresholds: @skills/seek-verdict/references/policy-mapping.md │
│ │
│ ⚠️ Never send Claude's classification to Codex │
│ --triage mode: stop here, output verdict + classification │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Phase 3: Execute Investigation │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Skip if verdict = DISMISS_VERIFIED (per policy-mapping thresholds) │
│ Otherwise: invoke corresponding investigation command │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Phase 4: Consolidated Report │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Synthesize investigation results + verdict, produce report │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 1mo ago Changed · +24 lines 7151c18e98aa
- 1mo ago First seen · 252 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A d5b3d44170fc
issue-analyze is a skill published in the GitHub repository sd0xdev/sd0x-harness (194 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 3,122 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
codebase-hygiene
Two-mode skill: (1) find semantic duplicates — functions doing the same thing under different names, invisible to copy-paste detectors; (2) deepen shallow modules — thin wrappers and pass-through layers that spread complexity. Advisory and read-only; changes route through BUILD with full gates.
resolving-merge-conflicts
Use when a git merge or rebase reports conflicts and the operation is in progress.
code-review
Two-mode skill: (1) adversarial review — spec compliance + code quality + security, confidence-scored findings with file:line evidence; (2) receiving review — verify-before- agreeing discipline for acting on external/human review feedback.
debugging
Use when diagnosing a defect or regression: feedback loop FIRST, root cause before fix, blast radius after fix. Covers the 10-rung construction ladder, LSP-powered tracing, hypothesis quality criteria, and four-phase investigation.
verify-simplify
A final code-cleanup workflow that runs at the end of verification. It removes repeated or unnecessary logic after the other verification steps are complete.
evaluator-review-contract
Internal Auto-Harness evaluator skill for sprint contract review before implementation. Use only inside the Evaluator subagent during review mode.