Rail-Connector-MCP: Skill for Codex

.agents/skills/rail-reviewer/SKILL.md

rail-reviewer is a skill for Codex from SNComrade/Rail-Connector-MCP. It costs 73 tokens per session (1,709 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A procedure for asking Claude to independently review code or repository work through Rail Connector MCP, then checking Claude's claims against the local project.

In plain words
What is it for?
Running read-only code, security, performance, implementation, or final-quality reviews and producing a verified review report.
Why use it?
It provides a second opinion while keeping review conclusions grounded in the actual branch, files, and tests.

Skill for Codex

Written for Codex: agents/openai.yaml present. Also seen: names the NotebookEdit tool; installed under .agents/ (shared by several agents); mentions Codex.

This is SNComrade/Rail-Connector-MCP's own configuration. It tells Codex how to work on Rail-Connector-MCP itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything Rail-Connector-MCP configures →

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to SNComrade/Rail-Connector-MCP. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/SNComrade/Rail-Connector-MCP/main/.agents/skills/rail-reviewer/SKILL.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/SNComrade/Rail-Connector-MCP

Made for: Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for rail-reviewer

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sncomrade/rail-connector-mcp/rail-reviewer/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/sncomrade/rail-connector-mcp/rail-reviewer)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sncomrade/rail-connector-mcp/rail-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sncomrade/rail-connector-mcp/rail-reviewer/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for rail-reviewer

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sncomrade/rail-connector-mcp/rail-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sncomrade/rail-connector-mcp/rail-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 73 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,709 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00073 $0.01709
Opus 5 $0.00036 $0.00855
Sonnet 5 $0.00015 $0.00342
Haiku 4.5 $0.00007 $0.00171

Measured 7d ago against content hash ee6868375e12, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-11, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

rail-reviewer 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 7d 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.

.agents/skills/rail-reviewer/SKILL.md · 129 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 129 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Rail Connector Reviewer

Use Claude as an independent reviewer, then verify its claims locally. Claude output is evidence, not authority.

Rules

  • Use the target project's real same-OS cwd, not this skill repo unless this MCP itself is under review.
  • If MCP tools are unavailable, report that a fresh Codex task or restart is needed. Never imply that Claude reviewed something when it did not.
  • Ground branch, status, diff, relevant code, docs, and tests before prompting Claude.
  • Default report-only reviews to permissionMode: "dontAsk" when the installed CLI advertises it, pass disallowedTools: ["Edit", "Write", "NotebookEdit"], and include explicit no-edit constraints. dontAsk denies new permission requests while allowing read-only inspection. Use plan only as a compatibility fallback; never approve implementation from a report-only review. Report-only is verified by pre/post repository evidence; it is not an operating-system sandbox. Constrain shell use to inspection and use a read-only copy when hard isolation matters.
  • tools, allowedTools, and disallowedTools constrain built-in Claude tools only. MCP and connector tools can remain available; the current MCP does not offer a verified strict MCP-config roster. Inspect the effective roster when possible and do not describe the built-in deny list as hard connector isolation.
  • Leave trustWorkspace false unless the user explicitly authorizes trust after project configuration and hooks are inspected.
  • Honor an explicit user request for Ultracode with ultracode: true, confirmUltracode: true, and no ordinary effort. Check capability provenance and calibrated probe exit status plus environment blockers before launch, treating probe timeout or termination as inconclusive, then report posture.ultracodeAssessment without promoting xhigh alone to confirmed Ultracode. Keep the persisted child launchEnvironment separate from currentMcpEnvironment when a review reconnects after an MCP refresh. advertisedAsEffort: false or helpListsUltracode: false means help text is silent, not that the launch is unavailable. Read ultraEffortAttachment.active, lifecycle, and historyCoverage: a latest enter is active, a later exit is inactive, and a skipped or partial range is unknown until a later complete transition restores current state. Historical coverage remains partial after recovery. These attachments authenticate client-side transitions, not workflow execution. Inspect attentionStatus; a blocking environment, conflicting effort, or terminal-rejection conflict takes precedence without erasing lifecycle evidence.
  • Honor an explicit user request to test or use bypass only when capability inspection reports policy enabled and the call includes confirmBypassPermissions: true. Do not independently elevate and do not silently downgrade an explicit request.
  • Prefer submit_prompt and wait_for_claude_turn. Use capture for attention states, not as the primary final-report parser.
  • Keep waiting while workflowPending is true even if an assistant completion record is already present. Do not submit follow-up text, rename, replace, or ordinarily stop a session blocked with reason workflow_pending.
  • Treat workflowObservationUncertain: true as fail-closed pending evidence. A skipped session-log middle invalidates head-only current posture and cannot prove workflow completion until an explicit observed checkpoint restores certainty.
  • Read terminalState independently from the combined state; active workflow evidence may make the latter busy without proving that Claude's terminal is busy. When workflow pending clears, historical evidence should not remain in workflowPendingEvidence.
  • A tool_use record is not a final report. Check textTruncated, textSha256, and textCharacters before synthesizing an unusually large review. Use get_claude_result with the returned resultId until hasMore is false; treat resultId as an opaque record identity and verify the separate textSha256 content digest instead of treating the preview as complete.
  • Remote Control web may label the underlying xhigh setting Extra while UltraCode is active. A session-bound web Extra is compatible presentation, not confirmation or conflict. On an idle, empty composer, /effort ultracode is current-setting evidence but may change posture and does not prove launch provenance. Use a substantive turn, not a trivial prompt, when workflow activity is part of the review evidence.
  • Verify Claude's file paths, line references, commands, factual claims, and severity against local evidence before synthesis.
  • Default to one Claude reviewer with no delegated workflow. When parallel review is explicitly authorized, copy any user-supplied bounds into the prompt. Without supplied bounds, allow at most 3 workflow agents, one pass, no recursive delegation, 5 findings, 10 minutes, and 200k aggregate tokens; stop and synthesize when any bound is reached.

Read the full file on GitHub · 129 lines

Files

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.

Changes

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.

  1. 7d ago Changed · +19 lines ee6868375e12
  2. 10d ago First seen · 110 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A d06d9ca84cb5

Subscribe to this mod's changes

rail-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository SNComrade/Rail-Connector-MCP (0 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 1,709 once invoked, about $0.0004 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

pr-comments

Fetch and display GitHub PR review comments for the current branch.

warpdotdev/warp · 16 tokens

remarc

Manage Remarc session comments and contextual feedback. Use when the user mentions Remarc sessions, comments, handoff, triage, review, addressing, resolving, status updates, or summaries.

metedata/Remarc · 41 tokens

adversarial-verify

Use after completing any substantive piece of work (code change, analysis, document, configuration, answer to a hard question) and BEFORE presenting it as done. Switches you from author to attacker - you try to refute your own work and only present it if it survives. Do not skip because the work "looks clean"…

Hawkynt/ClaudeCodePortable · 82 tokens

swift-concurrency-pro

Reviews Swift code for concurrency correctness, modern API usage, and common async/await pitfalls. Use when reading, writing, or reviewing Swift concurrency code.

jacklandrin/OnlySwitch · 35 tokens

swiftui-pro

Comprehensively reviews SwiftUI code for best practices on modern APIs, maintainability, and performance. Use when reading, writing, or reviewing SwiftUI projects.

jacklandrin/OnlySwitch · 36 tokens

create-skill

Create new skills, modify and improve existing skills, and measure skill performance. Use when users want to create a skill from scratch, edit, or optimize an existing skill, run evals to test a skill, benchmark skill performance with variance analysis, or optimize a skill's description for better triggering accuracy.

warpdotdev/warp · 64 tokens