This skill provides guidance on using OpenAI's Codex CLI for detail-oriented code analysis. Use when the user explicitly invokes "/codex", asks to "use codex", "run codex", "have codex review", or when Claude determines that Codex's sharp-eyed analysis would complement its work on code review, bug hunting, or planning tasks.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Codex Integration?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/david-li0406-codex-integration)
---
name: codex-integration
description: This skill provides guidance on using OpenAI's Codex CLI for detail-oriented code analysis. Use when the user explicitly invokes "/codex", asks to "use codex", "run codex", "have codex review", or when Claude determines that Codex's sharp-eyed analysis would complement its work on code review, bug hunting, or planning tasks.
allowed-tools: Bash
---
# Codex Integration
OpenAI's Codex CLI is a complementary tool for detail-oriented code analysis. Codex excels at thorough, meticulous review work - think of it as a "sharp-eyed second opinion" for code.
## When to Use Codex
**Ideal use cases:**
- Deep code review for security vulnerabilities or correctness issues
- Thorough bug hunting in complex code paths
- Detailed implementation planning with attention to edge cases
- Getting a second perspective on critical code
- Exploratory analysis requiring meticulous attention
**Not ideal for:**
- Simple, straightforward tasks Claude handles well alone
- Interactive debugging sessions (Codex exec is non-interactive)
- Tasks where speed matters more than depth
- Trivial code changes or obvious fixes
## Invocation Methods
### Method 1: Explicit /codex Command
Users invoke directly with optional flags:
```
/codex review the authentication middleware for security issues
/codex --model gpt-5.2 analyze this algorithm
/codex --sandbox workspace-write generate tests for this module
```
**Available flags:**
| Flag | Values | Default |
|------|--------|---------|
| `--model` | any model name | gpt-5.2-codex |
| `--sandbox` | read-only, workspace-write, danger-full-access | read-only |
### Method 2: Spawning codex-agent
When Claude determines Codex would add value, spawn the `codex-agent` subagent:
```
"Let me have Codex take a detailed look at this code for potential bugs..."
[Spawn codex-agent with task description]
[Synthesize Codex's findings with own analysis]
```
The agent always uses safe defaults (gpt-5.2-codex, read-only sandbox).
## CLI Reference
Core command pattern for non-interactive execution (use inline prompt, not piped stdin):
```bash
codex exec \
--model gpt-5.2-codex \
--sandbox read-only \
"<prompt>" \
2>&1
```
**Key flags:**
- `--model, -m` - Model to use (gpt-5.2-codex recommended for code tasks)
- `--sandbox, -s` - Execution permissions (read-only safest)
- `2>&1` - Capture all output
**Note:** Interactive slash commands like `/review` only work in Codex's interactive mode, not via `codex exec`.
## Error Handling
### Codex Not Installed
If `codex` command not found, show:
```
Codex CLI is not installed.
To install:
brew install codex
Then authenticate:
codex login
For more info: https://developers.openai.com/codex/cli
```
### Common Issues
- **API key issues**: User needs to run `codex login` to authenticate
- **Timeout**: Complex tasks may take time. Be patient or try a simpler task description.
- **Sandbox errors**: If Codex needs to write files, user must specify `--sandbox workspace-write`
## Best Practices
1. **Start with defaults** - gpt-5.2-codex works well for most tasks
2. **Keep read-only sandbox** - Unless task explicitly requires file modifications
3. **Be specific in prompts** - Tell Codex exactly what to look for
4. **Synthesize results** - When using codex-agent, combine Codex's findings with Claude's analysis
## Prompting Best Practices
GPT-5.2-codex responds best to explicit, scoped prompts with concrete constraints.
### Core Principles
1. **Scope discipline** - Be explicit about boundaries
- DO: "Review ONLY the auth flow. Do NOT suggest unrelated improvements."
- DON'T: "Review this code" (too open-ended)
2. **Bias toward action** - Request concrete output
- DO: "List specific bugs found with file:line references"
- DON'T: "Tell me what you think about this code"
3. **No preambles** - Skip status updates
- Add to prompts: "Skip preambles. Lead with findings."
4. **Structured output** - Request specific formats
- "Format: `file.ts:line` - issue description"
### Task-Specific Prompt Templates
#### Security Review
```
Review <file/module> for security vulnerabilities.
Focus ONLY on: auth, injection, data exposure, access control.
Do NOT suggest style changes or refactoring.
Format each finding as: `file:line` - severity - issue
Skip preambles.
```
#### Bug Hunting
```
Find bugs in <file/module>.
Look for: edge cases, off-by-one, null handling, race conditions.
ONLY report actual bugs, not style issues.
Format: `file:line` - bug description - suggested fix
Skip preambles. Lead with findings.
```
#### Implementation Planning
```
Create implementation plan for: <feature>.
Constraints: <existing patterns to follow>.
Output structure:
1. Overview
2. Files to modify (with line ranges)
3. Implementation steps
4. Edge cases to handle
Do NOT include code samples unless critical. Skip preambles.
```
#### Code Review
```
Review <file> for correctness and reliability.
Focus ONLY on: logic errors, missing error handling, incorrect assumptions.
Ignore: style, naming, formatting.
Format: `file:line` - issue - recommendation
Skip preambles.
```