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 V-Songbird/foundry --skill codex-pipelinegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/V-Songbird/foundryWrote 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/v-songbird/foundry/codex-pipeline)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/v-songbird/foundry/codex-pipeline"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/v-songbird/foundry/codex-pipeline/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/v-songbird/foundry/codex-pipeline"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/v-songbird/foundry/codex-pipeline.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 | $0.00152 | $0.00585 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00076 | $0.00293 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00117 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00059 |
Grade A, and why
codex-pipeline 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 today.
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.
What it actually says
Codex pipeline
Cross-model build-and-review. This session architects, Codex implements, a fresh context reviews. The fresh review is the point: a second model with different blind spots catches what the implementer and the tests both miss.
1. Architect
- Read the code the task touches.
- Write a self-contained spec file: the contract, required error types, and an "Adversarial notes" section listing the edge cases you'd attack.
- Write a held-out verification suite yourself, named distinctly (e.g.
verify.test.js). Codex must never see it.
2. Implement
Call mcp__codex__codex with:
prompt: implement from the spec file, write and run its own selftest, and do NOT open the held-out suite (name it explicitly).cwdset to the working directory,sandbox: workspace-write,approval-policy: never.
Save the returned threadId. Codex returns only a one-paragraph summary —
trust the files on disk, never the summary.
3. Verify
Run the held-out suite plus the project's real gates (tests, types, lint) yourself, in this session.
4. Fresh review
Spawn a general-purpose Agent with no pipeline context: give it only the
spec path and the implementation path, read-only intent. Require it to
reproduce every suspected defect before reporting, and to return APPROVE or
REQUEST-CHANGES with repro input and actual-vs-expected output per defect.
5. Fix
Send confirmed defects — with their repros — to mcp__codex__codex-reply on
the saved threadId. Then re-run step 3.
6. Close
- At most two review→fix rounds; hand anything still open to the user.
- Report: what was built, verification results, what the fresh review caught.
- Never commit without the user's explicit go.
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.
- today First seen · 54 lines · 152 tokens per session scan A 4d081fd6000b
codex-pipeline is a skill published in the GitHub repository V-Songbird/foundry (4 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 152 tokens to every session and 585 once invoked, about $0.0008 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 2026-09-10.
Other skills, from other repositories
orbit
Autonomous pipeline — spec requirements, execute implementation, audit quality, and ship. Runs the full epic-harness orbit cycle in one go. Use when the user says "orbit", "full pipeline", "spec to ship", or describes a feature that needs end-to-end handling.
systematic-debugging
Systematic debugging approach for errors, test failures, and unexpected behavior. Use when encountering bugs, test failures, errors, or when debugging is needed. Prevents common anti-patterns like random fixes, skipping root cause analysis, and thrashing.
phpunit-integration-test-reviewing
Internal sub-skill. Do not auto-activate. Use only when explicitly invoked by name by another skill or agent.
phpunit-migration-test-reviewing
Internal sub-skill. Do not auto-activate. Use only when explicitly invoked by name by another skill or agent.
phpunit-test-team-reviewing
Use this skill when the user asks for a team-based, consensus, multi-reviewer, or red-team review of Shopware PHPUnit tests — trigger phrases like "team review these tests", "consensus review the tests in PR.
phpunit-unit-test-reviewing
Internal sub-skill. Do not auto-activate. Use only when explicitly invoked by name by another skill or agent.