adr
Write an Architecture Decision Record (ADR) for a feature — Context / Decision / Status / Consequences / Alternatives, filed as…
Independent second-opinion verification for any finding. Use when: Claude or user wants independent Codex verification of a review finding — dismiss (false positive check), confirm (does this issue exist?), or clarify (what's the impact?). Triggers: dismiss verification, seek
Claude Code
$ npx -y skills add sd0xdev/sd0x-harness --skill seek-verdict --agent claude-code
Codex
$ npx skills add sd0xdev/sd0x-harness --skill seek-verdict -a codex -y
Cursor
$ npx skills add sd0xdev/sd0x-harness --skill seek-verdict -a cursor -y
Gemini CLI
$ npx skills add sd0xdev/sd0x-harness --skill seek-verdict -a gemini-cli -y
GitHub Copilot
$ npx skills add sd0xdev/sd0x-harness --skill seek-verdict -a github-copilot -y
OpenCode
$ npx skills add sd0xdev/sd0x-harness --skill seek-verdict -a opencode -y
Windsurf
$ npx skills add sd0xdev/sd0x-harness --skill seek-verdict -a windsurf -y
name: seek-verdict allowed-tools: Bash(node:*), Bash(git:*), Read, Grep, Glob, Write description: "Independent second-opinion verification for any finding. Use when: Claude or user wants independent Codex verification of a review finding — dismiss (false positive check), confirm (does this issue exist?), or clarify (what's the impact?). Triggers: dismiss verification, seek verdict, verify dismiss, false positive check, second opinion, confirm finding, clarify impact. Not for: general code review (use codex-code-review), architecture debates (use codex-brainstorm). Output: [DISMISS_VERDICT] or [SEEK_VERDICT] audit trail with verdict, confidence, and evidence refs."
| Intent | Purpose | Eligible Severities | Output Token | |--------|---------|-------------------|-------------| | `dismiss` | Is this a false positive? | All (P0/P1/P2/Nit) | `[DISMISS_VERDICT]` | | `confirm` | Does this issue actually exist? | All | `[SEEK_VERDICT]` | | `clarify` | What's the actual impact? | All | `[SEEK_VERDICT]` |
**Default intent**: `dismiss` (backward compatible with v1).
| Severity | Authorization | Gate | |----------|-------------|------| | P0 | `DISMISS_CANDIDATE` | Human confirmation required | | P1 | `DISMISS_CANDIDATE` | Human confirmation required | | P2 | `DISMISS_VERIFIED` | Automated | | Nit | `DISMISS_VERIFIED` | Automated |
P0/P1 dismiss produces a candidate, not a final authorization. See [Policy Mapping](references/policy-mapping.md) for human gate protocol.
sequenceDiagram
participant C as Claude
participant S as seek-verdict
participant X as Codex (fresh thread)
C->>S: Finding + intent + severity
Note over S: Phase A: Candidate Packaging
S->>S: Extract finding_packet<br/>(no Claude conclusions)
S->>X: Phase B: Blind Independent Verdict
Note over X: Independent research<br/>git status / grep / cat
X-->>S: verdict + confidence + evidence
Note over S: Phase C: Policy Mapping (intent x severity)
alt intent=dismiss + P2/Nit
S-->>C: DISMISS_VERIFIED / FIX_REQUIRED (automated)
else intent=dismiss + P0/P1
S-->>C: DISMISS_CANDIDATE + Need Human (human gate)
else intent=confirm/clarify
S-->>C: [SEEK_VERDICT] informational result
endExtract finding artifact from review output:
| Field | Source | |-------|--------| | `finding_key` | `file + canonical_issue_text` | | `severity` | `<P0 \| P1 \| P2 \| Nit>` | | `intent` | `<dismiss \| confirm \| clarify>` | | `original_finding_text` | Codex review original (secrets redacted) | | `origin_thread_id` | Review session threadId | | `current_head_sha` | `git rev-parse HEAD` | | `relevant_diff` | `git diff HEAD -- <file>` |
**Critical**: Record Claude's hypothesis locally. **Never send it to Codex.**
Use the prompt template in [Verdict Prompt](references/verdict-prompt.md).
| Requirement | Detail | |-------------|--------| | Thread | **Fresh** — dispatch per `@skills/codex-code-review/references/codex-transport.md` § Start (never reuse a review thread) | | Anti-anchoring | No Claude conclusions in prompt |
Apply thresholds from [Policy Mapping](references/policy-mapping.md).
**Dismiss intent**: graduated thresholds by severity (P0: 0.95/4, P1: 0.90/3, P2: 0.80/2, Nit: 0.70/1).
**Confirm intent**: ACTIONABLE->CONFIRMED, NON_ACTIONABLE->DISPUTED, low confidence->UNCERTAIN.
**Clarify intent**: HIGH_IMPACT / LOW_IMPACT / UNCERTAIN.
Output audit trail per [Policy Mapping](references/policy-mapping.md).
When Phase C maps the verdict to `FIX_REQUIRED` (raw `ACTIONABLE` at or above the confidence floor — `FIX_REQUIRED` is the mapping's word, never Codex's) and Claude has objective counter-evidence:
See [Policy Mapping](references/policy-mapping.md) for full rules.
**Dismiss intent**:
[DISMISS_VERDICT] key=<file|canonical_issue> | severity=<P0-Nit> | verdict=<DISMISS_VERIFIED|DISMISS_CANDIDATE|FIX_REQUIRED|NEED_HUMAN> | confidence=<0..1> | codex_thread=<id> | evidence=<brief> | timestamp=<ISO8601> | intent=dismiss | authorization=<automated|human-required|human-confirmed>
**Confirm/Clarify intent**:
[SEEK_VERDICT] key=<file|canonical_issue> | severity=<P0-Nit> | intent=<confirm|clarify> | verdict=<CONFIRMED|DISPUTED|HIGH_IMPACT|LOW_IMPACT|UNCERTAIN> | confidence=<0..1> | codex_thread=<id> | evidence=<brief> | timestamp=<ISO8601>
| File | Purpose | |------|---------| | [Verdict Prompt](references/verdict-prompt.md) | Codex blind verification prompt template | | [Policy Mapping](references/policy-mapping.
Language: English | 繁體中文 | 简体中文 | 日本語 | 한국어 | Español The harness layer for Claude Code. Let the model choose the path. Keep "done" verifiable. Claude has discretion inside a closed, test-pinned anchor set.
Write an Architecture Decision Record (ADR) for a feature — Context / Decision / Status / Consequences / Alternatives, filed as…
Install and set up the optional agentctl mod (task scope, refusal before execution, evidence that goes stale, model-free…
Architecture design and documentation. Produces 3-architecture.md with component diagrams, data flow, integration points, and…
Context-aware Q&A with auto context gathering. Use when: user has a quick question about codebase, git history, rules, docs, or…
Industry best practices conformance audit with mandatory adversarial debate. Produces audit artifact: verdict (OK/WARN/FAIL) +…
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, modifying behavior, or…
Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the skills in this repo.