codex-doctor@0.1.2
CAUTION· static onlyPublisher claims: "Analyze local Codex session telemetry and produce privacy-safe efficiency reports with actionable workflow recommendations. Use when the user asks to run Codex Doctor, inspect Codex productivity, diagnose context bloat, repository exploration, validation or retry patterns, compare recent sessions, or interpret a codex-efficiency-report HTML/JSON file. Default to local telemetry-only analysis; use the optional compact AI diagnosis only when the user explicitly requests AI interpretation." Observed in sandbox: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Coverage
Static only; nothing was run yet.The label rests on the code, the instruction files and the publisher. The honeypot run replaces this verdict when it completes.
Is [email protected] safe to install?
KillerSkills analysed it statically (a sandbox run is pending) on 2026-11-07 and scored it 71/100 (Caution). It is not known to be malicious, but it has behaviour or code a security policy should decide on before install. Notable findings: Instructs the agent to modify its persistent memory or instruction files. Summary: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Behavior trace
Queued for honeypot run · static analysis onlyThis version has not been detonated yet. The score above counts behavior as unknown (50/100), so it cannot read Verified until the honeypot run completes and replaces this verdict.
Static findings
Do not automatically edit `AGENTS.md`, install Skills, commit changes, open or merge PRs, or change production state from a report. Present the recommendation first and make those changes only when thFix: Remove the text that addresses the agent rather than the reader; describe behavior, do not instruct.No other findings across 174 lines in 3 files.
Cost to the agent
Tokens estimated at four characters each. Skills load their instruction text when triggered; the figure is what that costs.
Known vulnerabilities
Vulnerability advisories (OSV) cover npm and PyPI packages; this registry has no advisory database.
What would make this Verified
9 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim wardlu: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.