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 review-specgit 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/review-spec)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/review-spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/review-spec/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/review-spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sd0xdev/sd0x-harness/review-spec.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Agent Snooping · line 26 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
- medium Agent Snooping · line 190 Skill enumerates or reads other installed skills. Access to other skills' SKILL.md files or the skills directory reveals prompt instructions, capabilities, and secrets that should be invisible to peer skills.Fix: Remove all code or instructions that list or read other skills' files or directories. Skills should operate independently; cross-skill access is a privilege escalation.
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 | $0.00019 | $0.02013 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00805 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00403 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00201 |
Grade A, and why
review-spec 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 — 193 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Spec
Trigger
- Keywords: review spec, spec review, tech spec review, review-spec
When NOT to Use
- Code review (use
/codex-review-fast) - General document review (use
/codex-review-doc) - Writing a new spec (use
/tech-spec)
Relationship to /codex-review-doc
Both are doc-plane producers of the same gate, dispatched over the same
Codex exec transport (@skills/codex-code-review/references/codex-transport.md) and emitting the same sentinel pair. They differ only in review
depth and dimensions: /review-spec is the design-landing depth (completeness, feasibility,
risk, code consistency, test strategy), /codex-review-doc is the general document depth.
Loop mechanics, severity calibration and [NIT_DEFERRED] handling are shared — see
@skills/doc-review/SKILL.md.
Why not an Agent dispatch. The gate verdict is behaviour-layer: it comes from the reviewer's
report, and review-state.js note records it (@rules/auto-loop.md § Enforcement — nothing parses
reviewer output; hooks are reminders). What makes a verdict usable is that a contract-aware
reviewer produced it against this family's template and sentinels. A built-in agent dispatched
ad hoc is not that reviewer and its output closes nothing. Dispatching Codex over the shared
transport is what makes the verdict this skill's to note. See @rules/auto-loop.md § Review Dispatch.
Codex Dispatch
Bind every placeholder before writing prompt.md. The body below is body-only, so nothing
evaluates an expression inside it: ${FILE_PATH} and ${PROJECT_ROOT} must carry real values by the
time the file is written, or the cat ${FILE_PATH} instructions reach Codex as literal text and
cannot be run.
You are a senior technical spec reviewer. Perform a Document Review of the technical specification below, at design-landing depth.
Document Info
- Path: ${FILE_PATH}
- Type: technical specification
- Project root: ${PROJECT_ROOT}
⚠️ Important: You must independently read and research the project ⚠️
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 · +11 lines bfc1ec0647b9
- 1mo ago First seen · 182 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A 4c6752004262
review-spec is a skill published in the GitHub repository sd0xdev/sd0x-harness (194 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 2,013 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
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.
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.
evaluator-review-contract
Internal Auto-Harness evaluator skill for sprint contract review before implementation. Use only inside the Evaluator subagent during review mode.
comet-review
A read-only review guide for checking the current Comet change, a managed software-change workflow. It focuses on correctness, security, and boundary problems without changing files or advancing the workflow.
comet-github-pr-review
A read-only review process for pull requests in Comet's GitHub repositories. A pull request is a proposed code change; the review checks its current code, related issue, comments, merge status, and automated checks.
exploration
Two-mode exploration skill: (1) design dialogue — turn rough ideas into validated designs through collaborative interview before planning; (2) spike — throwaway code answering ONE design question, deleted or absorbed, never shipped. Router invokes mode via dispatch context.