AI peer review via OpenAI Codex CLI. Use when reviewing code changes, validating technical decisions, comparing implementation approaches, or getting a second opinion on architecture choices. Triggers on /codex, /codex-review, or auto-triggers when presenting significant alternatives to user.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Codex 20?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/david-li0406-codex-20)
---
name: codex
description: AI peer review via OpenAI Codex CLI. Use when reviewing code changes, validating technical decisions, comparing implementation approaches, or getting a second opinion on architecture choices. Triggers on /codex, /codex-review, or auto-triggers when presenting significant alternatives to user.
allowed-tools:
- Bash(codex exec:*)
- Read
- Glob
- Grep
- Bash(git status:*)
- Bash(git diff:*)
- Bash(git log:*)
user-invocable: true
---
# Codex Peer Review
Consult OpenAI's Codex CLI for peer review before presenting significant decisions or completed work to user.
## When to Auto-Trigger (Without Explicit /codex)
Auto-consult Codex when about to:
- Present 2+ alternative approaches to solve a problem
- Complete a significant feature implementation
- Propose architectural decisions
- Suggest refactoring strategies
- Present trade-off analysis
**Skip auto-consultation for:**
- Trivial fixes (typos, formatting, simple one-liners)
- Direct user instructions with no ambiguity
- Information lookups / explanations
- When user explicitly said "just do X"
## Codex CLI Reference
### Code Review (Scoped)
```bash
# Review uncommitted changes (staged + unstaged + untracked)
codex exec review --uncommitted "Focus on: <specific concerns>"
# Review against base branch
codex exec review --base main "Focus on: <specific concerns>"
# Review specific commit
codex exec review --commit <SHA> "Focus on: <specific concerns>"
```
### Freeform Consultation
```bash
# Tech decisions, architecture questions, approach validation
codex exec "Given context X, should we use approach A or B? Consider: <factors>"
```
### Prompt Crafting
Claude decides how to prompt Codex. Guidelines:
- Be specific about what feedback you want
- Provide relevant context (file names, constraints, goals)
- For code review: mention what changed and why
- For decisions: frame the trade-offs clearly
## Review Loop Protocol
### Max Iterations: 3
Execute up to 3 rounds of Claude ↔ Codex exchange:
1. **Round 1**: Initial consultation
- Send context + question/code to Codex
- Receive Codex's feedback
2. **Round 2** (if disagreement): Counter-argument
- If Claude disagrees with Codex's assessment, argue back
- Provide reasoning for disagreement
- Ask Codex to reconsider or clarify
3. **Round 3** (if still unresolved): Final exchange
- Last attempt at consensus
- If still disagreeing, note the impasse
### Disagreement Handling
**Do NOT blindly accept Codex feedback.** Evaluate critically:
- Does the suggestion align with project conventions?
- Is the concern valid given the specific context?
- Would the change actually improve the code/decision?
If Claude disagrees:
```bash
codex exec "You suggested X, but I disagree because Y. The context you may have missed: Z. Please reconsider or explain why X is still better."
```
### Iteration Limit Reached
If 3 rounds pass without consensus, notify user:
```
⚠️ Codex review: Reached iteration limit without consensus
**Point of contention**: [what we disagreed on]
**Claude's position**: [your stance + reasoning]
**Codex's position**: [their stance + reasoning]
Proceeding with: [which approach and why]
```
## Output Format
After consultation completes, summarize for user:
```markdown
## Codex Review Summary
**Consulted on**: [code changes | tech decision | architecture]
**Consensus reached**: Yes/No (N rounds)
### Key Points
- [Agreement 1]
- [Agreement 2]
### Disagreements (if any)
| Topic | Claude | Codex | Resolution |
|-------|--------|-------|------------|
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
### Final Decision
[What was decided and brief rationale]
```
## Invocation Modes
### Explicit: `/codex` or `/codex-review`
User explicitly requests peer review. Always execute full loop.
### Auto-trigger
When about to present alternatives or complete significant work:
1. Pause before responding to user
2. Run Codex consultation
3. Incorporate feedback (or note disagreement)
4. Then present to user with review summary
## Examples
### Code Review (Uncommitted Changes)
```bash
codex exec review --uncommitted "Review this authentication refactor. Key changes: moved from session-based to JWT. Check for security issues and edge cases."
```
### Architecture Decision
```bash
codex exec "Building a real-time notification system. Options: A) WebSockets with Redis pub/sub, B) Server-Sent Events with PostgreSQL NOTIFY, C) Polling with caching. Constraints: <1000 concurrent users, existing PostgreSQL infra, team familiar with Redis. Which approach and why?"
```
### Validating Trade-offs
```bash
codex exec "User asked for feature X. I'm proposing to implement it via Y because of Z. Are there approaches I'm missing? Any concerns with Y?"
```