sd0xdev/sd0x-harness

code-investigate

Dual-perspective code investigation. Use when: deep code analysis needing both Claude and Codex perspectives. Not for: quick exploration (use code-explore), code review (use codex-code-review). Output: integrated findings from dual analysis.

First seen Mar 9, 2026

Installation

$ npx skills add sd0xdev/sd0x-harness --skill code-investigate

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from sd0xdev/sd0x-harness · top by installs.

npx skills add sd0xdev/sd0x-harness

Browse all from sd0xdev/sd0x-harness

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Repository health

Stars 188
License LICENSE
Default branch main
Open issues 3
Status Active

Skill metadata

Parsed from SKILL.md frontmatter.

Allowed toolsRead, Grep, Glob, Bash(git:*), Bash(node:*), Write

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 6,470 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 265 B

History

  1. First seen on skills.sh
  2. First recorded snapshot · 20 installs

SKILL.md

Code Investigate Skill

Trigger

  • Keywords: investigate code, how feature works, trace implementation, dual confirmation, deep dive, how code works, what this code does, code research

When NOT to Use

  • Just need quick lookup (use Grep/Glob directly)
  • Code review (use codex-review)
  • System verification (use feature-verify)
  • Git history tracking (use git-investigate)

Core Principle

Codex must explore independently. Feeding Claude's conclusions to Codex is prohibited.
┌─────────────────┐     ┌─────────────────┐
│ Claude Explores  │     │ Codex Explores   │
│ Independently    │     │ Independently    │
│   (Phase 1-2)   │     │    (Phase 3)     │
└────────┬────────┘     └────────┬────────┘
         │                       │
         ▼                       ▼
   ┌───────────┐           ┌───────────┐
   │ Claude    │           │ Codex     │
   │ Conclusion│           │ Conclusion│
   └─────┬─────┘           └─────┬─────┘
         │                       │
         └───────────┬───────────┘
                     ▼
              ┌─────────────┐
              │ Consolidated│
              │   Report    │
              │  (Phase 4)  │
              └─────────────┘

Workflow

Phase Name Action Output
1 Claude Explore Grep/Glob/Read to search code Related files list
2 Claude Conclude Analyze logic, form understanding Initial conclusion (internal)
3 Codex Explore Invoke Codex exec to explore independently Codex analysis report
4 Integrate Compare both perspectives, mark differences Consolidated report

Codex Invocation Rules

Dispatch Phase 3 per @skills/codex-code-review/references/codex-transport.md § Start with the template in references/prompts.md. The transport pins the sandbox and the approval policy, and it derives the working directory from git rev-parse --show-toplevel — none of the three is chosen here, and this skill no longer restates them.

Bind every placeholder before writing prompt.md. The template is body-only, so nothing evaluates an expression inside it: ${USERQUESTION} and ${PROJECTPATH} must carry real values by the time the file is written.

Correct Approach

Code Investigation Task

Question

${USER_QUESTION}

Project Info

  • Path: ${PROJECT_PATH}
  • Tech Stack: ${TECH_STACK} <!-- one bound value, read from the repository's own manifest and layout. {FRAMEWORK}/{DATABASE} were never in this file's binding contract and rendered literally, and the hard-coded TypeScript was false for any repository that is not one — this project is JavaScript. Omit the line entirely rather than guess. -->

Please independently explore the codebase and answer:

  1. What files are related?
  2. How does the core logic work?
  3. What is the data flow?
  4. What are the key dependencies?

Please grep/read and explore on your own, then provide your analysis.

Prohibited Approaches

Pattern Problem Example
Feeding conclusion Claude's findings leak to Codex Claude found these files: ${findings}
Leading question Presupposes answer I think the problem is in cache, verify
Scope restriction Prevents independent exploration Only look at src/service/

Output

## Investigation Report
- **Claude findings**: <independent analysis>
- **Codex findings**: <independent analysis>
- **Integrated conclusion**: <merged findings>
- **Confidence**: High / Medium / Low

Verification Checklist

Check Standard
Claude independent conclusion Phase 2 forms conclusion, not output to user
Codex prompt is clean Contains only question + project path, no Claude findings
Report perspectives separated Claude / Codex conclusions presented separately
Integration is complete Marks agreement, differences, possible gaps

References

File Purpose When to Read
references/prompts.md Codex prompt templates Before Phase 3
references/output-template.md Report format During Phase 4

Examples

Feature Investigation

Input: Investigate how order processing works
Phase 1: Grep "processOrder" -> Read src/service/order/*.ts
Phase 2: Form understanding: Controller -> Service -> Repository write
Phase 3: Codex explores independently (only given question + path)
Phase 4: Consolidated report -> mark both perspectives

Mechanism Understanding

Input: How does the API caching mechanism work?
Phase 1: Grep "cache" + "portfolio" -> Read related files
Phase 2: Understand Redis TTL + fallback mechanism
Phase 3: Codex investigates independently
Phase 4: Compare differences -> output consolidated report

Problem Diagnosis

Input: Why is token price sometimes null?
Phase 1: Search price-related logic + error handling
Phase 2: Identify possible fallback paths
Phase 3: Codex diagnoses independently
Phase 4: Synthesize both findings -> list possible causes