SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AC local-codex

Launch and manage OpenAI Codex CLI (local agent) as a non-interactive coding sub-agent. Use when the user wants to delegate coding tasks to Codex, run code reviews, generate or refactor code, or use Codex GPT-5.5 agent capabilities through local CLI. Triggers on phrases like 'codex', 'run codex', 'codex exec', 'code review with codex', 'delegate to codex', 'use codex for coding', or any request to invoke the local Codex CLI agent. Uses ChatGPT Pro OAuth (flat-rate, no API charges) via ~/.codex/auth.json. Never uses API keys.

daymade/claude-code-skills Agent Skills author: daymade 3 files body ≈ 832 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 2 h ago

Launch and manage OpenAI Codex CLI (local agent) as a non-interactive coding sub-agent.

As a process C 61/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, running it twice, progress reporting

IntegrationSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
98/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
94
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
61/100
Has gaps
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
Running it twice w 4
30
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 61/100

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 85Steps. 28 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 832 tokens
    • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 530: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 13 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 28 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (6 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
    • +3All 1 scripts are documented

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 94.