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 vancelin/codex-review-plugin-for-cc --skill codex-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vancelin/codex-review-plugin-for-ccWrote 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/vancelin/codex-review-plugin-for-cc/codex-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/vancelin/codex-review-plugin-for-cc/codex-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vancelin/codex-review-plugin-for-cc/codex-review/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/vancelin/codex-review-plugin-for-cc/codex-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vancelin/codex-review-plugin-for-cc/codex-review.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 | $0.00109 | $0.02087 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00044 | $0.00835 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00417 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00209 |
Grade A, and why
codex-review 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 248 lines · 109 tokens per session scan A c50649e10157
codex-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository vancelin/codex-review-plugin-for-cc (3 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 109 tokens to every session and 2,087 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
vanity-engineering-review
Reviews codebases, architectures, PRs, and technical plans for vanity engineering — code and systems built for the developer's ego, resume, or intellectual pleasure rather than delivering user or business value. Triggers on: "review this code", "is this over-engineered", "code review", "architecture review"…
pr-screenshot-comparison
Create clear, polished before-and-after screenshots from the actual running product for a GitHub pull request. Use when a UI change needs visual proof: capture matching product states, crop to the relevant UI, stitch and caption one comparison image, attach it natively to the PR, and keep the image out of the…
pr-description
Write or update a GitHub PR description as a short, skimmable list of key points grounded in the diff and real verification. Use when opening a PR or editing its description.
challenge
Use before a root-cause, done/verified claim, irreversible action, or 2nd-time fix reaches the owner (APEX or plain conversation); also fires at every eLicit/Verify gate. Not for code correctness (use sniper).
code-quality
Use when validating code quality after modifications -- SOLID compliance, DRY duplication, linter errors, architecture violations. Do NOT use for functional verification (run verification FIRST, then code-quality).
elicitation
Use when an expert agent self-reviews and self-corrects code after the Execute phase, before sniper validation (BMAD-METHOD elicitation techniques).