mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-05-05 05:05:08 +02:00
feat: office-hours Claude subagent fallback when Codex unavailable (#464)
Updates generateCodexSecondOpinion resolver to always offer second opinion and fall back to Claude subagent when Codex is unavailable or errors. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
+34
-17
@@ -672,21 +672,19 @@ Use AskUserQuestion to confirm. If the user disagrees with a premise, revise und
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 3.5: Cross-Model Second Opinion (optional)
|
||||
|
||||
**Binary check first — no question if unavailable:**
|
||||
**Binary check first:**
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
which codex 2>/dev/null && echo "CODEX_AVAILABLE" || echo "CODEX_NOT_AVAILABLE"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If `CODEX_NOT_AVAILABLE`: skip Phase 3.5 entirely — no message, no AskUserQuestion. Proceed directly to Phase 4.
|
||||
Use AskUserQuestion (regardless of codex availability):
|
||||
|
||||
If `CODEX_AVAILABLE`: use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
|
||||
> Want a second opinion from a different AI model? Codex will independently review your problem statement, key answers, premises, and any landscape findings from this session. It hasn't seen this conversation — it gets a structured summary. Usually takes 2-5 minutes.
|
||||
> Want a second opinion from an independent AI perspective? It will review your problem statement, key answers, premises, and any landscape findings from this session without having seen this conversation — it gets a structured summary. Usually takes 2-5 minutes.
|
||||
> A) Yes, get a second opinion
|
||||
> B) No, proceed to alternatives
|
||||
|
||||
If B: skip Phase 3.5 entirely. Remember that Codex did NOT run (affects design doc, founder signals, and Phase 4 below).
|
||||
If B: skip Phase 3.5 entirely. Remember that the second opinion did NOT run (affects design doc, founder signals, and Phase 4 below).
|
||||
|
||||
**If A: Run the Codex cold read.**
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -723,15 +721,26 @@ cat "$TMPERR_OH"
|
||||
rm -f "$TMPERR_OH" "$CODEX_PROMPT_FILE"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Error handling:** All errors are non-blocking — Codex second opinion is a quality enhancement, not a prerequisite.
|
||||
- **Auth failure:** If stderr contains "auth", "login", "unauthorized", or "API key": "Codex authentication failed. Run \`codex login\` to authenticate. Skipping second opinion."
|
||||
- **Timeout:** "Codex timed out after 5 minutes. Skipping second opinion."
|
||||
- **Empty response:** "Codex returned no response. Stderr: <paste relevant error>. Skipping second opinion."
|
||||
**Error handling:** All errors are non-blocking — second opinion is a quality enhancement, not a prerequisite.
|
||||
- **Auth failure:** If stderr contains "auth", "login", "unauthorized", or "API key": "Codex authentication failed. Run \`codex login\` to authenticate." Fall back to Claude subagent.
|
||||
- **Timeout:** "Codex timed out after 5 minutes." Fall back to Claude subagent.
|
||||
- **Empty response:** "Codex returned no response." Fall back to Claude subagent.
|
||||
|
||||
On any error, proceed to Phase 4 — do NOT fall back to a Claude subagent (this is brainstorming, not adversarial review).
|
||||
On any Codex error, fall back to the Claude subagent below.
|
||||
|
||||
**If CODEX_NOT_AVAILABLE (or Codex errored):**
|
||||
|
||||
Dispatch via the Agent tool. The subagent has fresh context — genuine independence.
|
||||
|
||||
Subagent prompt: same mode-appropriate prompt as above (Startup or Builder variant).
|
||||
|
||||
Present findings under a `SECOND OPINION (Claude subagent):` header.
|
||||
|
||||
If the subagent fails or times out: "Second opinion unavailable. Continuing to Phase 4."
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Presentation:**
|
||||
|
||||
If Codex ran:
|
||||
```
|
||||
SECOND OPINION (Codex):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
@@ -739,10 +748,18 @@ SECOND OPINION (Codex):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Cross-model synthesis:** After presenting Codex output, provide 3-5 bullet synthesis:
|
||||
- Where Claude agrees with Codex
|
||||
If Claude subagent ran:
|
||||
```
|
||||
SECOND OPINION (Claude subagent):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
<full subagent output, verbatim — do not truncate or summarize>
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Cross-model synthesis:** After presenting the second opinion output, provide 3-5 bullet synthesis:
|
||||
- Where Claude agrees with the second opinion
|
||||
- Where Claude disagrees and why
|
||||
- Whether Codex's challenged premise changes Claude's recommendation
|
||||
- Whether the challenged premise changes Claude's recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Premise revision check:** If Codex challenged an agreed premise, use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -780,7 +797,7 @@ Rules:
|
||||
- One must be the **"minimal viable"** (fewest files, smallest diff, ships fastest).
|
||||
- One must be the **"ideal architecture"** (best long-term trajectory, most elegant).
|
||||
- One can be **creative/lateral** (unexpected approach, different framing of the problem).
|
||||
- If Codex proposed a prototype in Phase 3.5, consider using it as a starting point for the creative/lateral approach.
|
||||
- If the second opinion (Codex or Claude subagent) proposed a prototype in Phase 3.5, consider using it as a starting point for the creative/lateral approach.
|
||||
|
||||
**RECOMMENDATION:** Choose [X] because [one-line reason].
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -944,7 +961,7 @@ Supersedes: {prior filename — omit this line if first design on this branch}
|
||||
{from Phase 3}
|
||||
|
||||
## Cross-Model Perspective
|
||||
{If Codex ran in Phase 3.5: Codex's independent cold read — steelman, key insight, challenged premise, prototype suggestion. Verbatim or close paraphrase of what Codex said. If Codex did NOT run (skipped or unavailable): omit this section entirely — do not include it.}
|
||||
{If second opinion ran in Phase 3.5 (Codex or Claude subagent): independent cold read — steelman, key insight, challenged premise, prototype suggestion. Verbatim or close paraphrase. If second opinion did NOT run (skipped or unavailable): omit this section entirely — do not include it.}
|
||||
|
||||
## Approaches Considered
|
||||
### Approach A: {name}
|
||||
@@ -1001,7 +1018,7 @@ Supersedes: {prior filename — omit this line if first design on this branch}
|
||||
{from Phase 3}
|
||||
|
||||
## Cross-Model Perspective
|
||||
{If Codex ran in Phase 3.5: Codex's independent cold read — coolest version, key insight, existing tools, prototype suggestion. Verbatim or close paraphrase of what Codex said. If Codex did NOT run (skipped or unavailable): omit this section entirely — do not include it.}
|
||||
{If second opinion ran in Phase 3.5 (Codex or Claude subagent): independent cold read — coolest version, key insight, existing tools, prototype suggestion. Verbatim or close paraphrase. If second opinion did NOT run (skipped or unavailable): omit this section entirely — do not include it.}
|
||||
|
||||
## Approaches Considered
|
||||
### Approach A: {name}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -380,7 +380,7 @@ Rules:
|
||||
- One must be the **"minimal viable"** (fewest files, smallest diff, ships fastest).
|
||||
- One must be the **"ideal architecture"** (best long-term trajectory, most elegant).
|
||||
- One can be **creative/lateral** (unexpected approach, different framing of the problem).
|
||||
- If Codex proposed a prototype in Phase 3.5, consider using it as a starting point for the creative/lateral approach.
|
||||
- If the second opinion (Codex or Claude subagent) proposed a prototype in Phase 3.5, consider using it as a starting point for the creative/lateral approach.
|
||||
|
||||
**RECOMMENDATION:** Choose [X] because [one-line reason].
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -459,7 +459,7 @@ Supersedes: {prior filename — omit this line if first design on this branch}
|
||||
{from Phase 3}
|
||||
|
||||
## Cross-Model Perspective
|
||||
{If Codex ran in Phase 3.5: Codex's independent cold read — steelman, key insight, challenged premise, prototype suggestion. Verbatim or close paraphrase of what Codex said. If Codex did NOT run (skipped or unavailable): omit this section entirely — do not include it.}
|
||||
{If second opinion ran in Phase 3.5 (Codex or Claude subagent): independent cold read — steelman, key insight, challenged premise, prototype suggestion. Verbatim or close paraphrase. If second opinion did NOT run (skipped or unavailable): omit this section entirely — do not include it.}
|
||||
|
||||
## Approaches Considered
|
||||
### Approach A: {name}
|
||||
@@ -516,7 +516,7 @@ Supersedes: {prior filename — omit this line if first design on this branch}
|
||||
{from Phase 3}
|
||||
|
||||
## Cross-Model Perspective
|
||||
{If Codex ran in Phase 3.5: Codex's independent cold read — coolest version, key insight, existing tools, prototype suggestion. Verbatim or close paraphrase of what Codex said. If Codex did NOT run (skipped or unavailable): omit this section entirely — do not include it.}
|
||||
{If second opinion ran in Phase 3.5 (Codex or Claude subagent): independent cold read — coolest version, key insight, existing tools, prototype suggestion. Verbatim or close paraphrase. If second opinion did NOT run (skipped or unavailable): omit this section entirely — do not include it.}
|
||||
|
||||
## Approaches Considered
|
||||
### Approach A: {name}
|
||||
|
||||
+31
-14
@@ -250,21 +250,19 @@ export function generateCodexSecondOpinion(ctx: TemplateContext): string {
|
||||
|
||||
return `## Phase 3.5: Cross-Model Second Opinion (optional)
|
||||
|
||||
**Binary check first — no question if unavailable:**
|
||||
**Binary check first:**
|
||||
|
||||
\`\`\`bash
|
||||
which codex 2>/dev/null && echo "CODEX_AVAILABLE" || echo "CODEX_NOT_AVAILABLE"
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
If \`CODEX_NOT_AVAILABLE\`: skip Phase 3.5 entirely — no message, no AskUserQuestion. Proceed directly to Phase 4.
|
||||
Use AskUserQuestion (regardless of codex availability):
|
||||
|
||||
If \`CODEX_AVAILABLE\`: use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
|
||||
> Want a second opinion from a different AI model? Codex will independently review your problem statement, key answers, premises, and any landscape findings from this session. It hasn't seen this conversation — it gets a structured summary. Usually takes 2-5 minutes.
|
||||
> Want a second opinion from an independent AI perspective? It will review your problem statement, key answers, premises, and any landscape findings from this session without having seen this conversation — it gets a structured summary. Usually takes 2-5 minutes.
|
||||
> A) Yes, get a second opinion
|
||||
> B) No, proceed to alternatives
|
||||
|
||||
If B: skip Phase 3.5 entirely. Remember that Codex did NOT run (affects design doc, founder signals, and Phase 4 below).
|
||||
If B: skip Phase 3.5 entirely. Remember that the second opinion did NOT run (affects design doc, founder signals, and Phase 4 below).
|
||||
|
||||
**If A: Run the Codex cold read.**
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -301,15 +299,26 @@ cat "$TMPERR_OH"
|
||||
rm -f "$TMPERR_OH" "$CODEX_PROMPT_FILE"
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
**Error handling:** All errors are non-blocking — Codex second opinion is a quality enhancement, not a prerequisite.
|
||||
- **Auth failure:** If stderr contains "auth", "login", "unauthorized", or "API key": "Codex authentication failed. Run \\\`codex login\\\` to authenticate. Skipping second opinion."
|
||||
- **Timeout:** "Codex timed out after 5 minutes. Skipping second opinion."
|
||||
- **Empty response:** "Codex returned no response. Stderr: <paste relevant error>. Skipping second opinion."
|
||||
**Error handling:** All errors are non-blocking — second opinion is a quality enhancement, not a prerequisite.
|
||||
- **Auth failure:** If stderr contains "auth", "login", "unauthorized", or "API key": "Codex authentication failed. Run \\\`codex login\\\` to authenticate." Fall back to Claude subagent.
|
||||
- **Timeout:** "Codex timed out after 5 minutes." Fall back to Claude subagent.
|
||||
- **Empty response:** "Codex returned no response." Fall back to Claude subagent.
|
||||
|
||||
On any error, proceed to Phase 4 — do NOT fall back to a Claude subagent (this is brainstorming, not adversarial review).
|
||||
On any Codex error, fall back to the Claude subagent below.
|
||||
|
||||
**If CODEX_NOT_AVAILABLE (or Codex errored):**
|
||||
|
||||
Dispatch via the Agent tool. The subagent has fresh context — genuine independence.
|
||||
|
||||
Subagent prompt: same mode-appropriate prompt as above (Startup or Builder variant).
|
||||
|
||||
Present findings under a \`SECOND OPINION (Claude subagent):\` header.
|
||||
|
||||
If the subagent fails or times out: "Second opinion unavailable. Continuing to Phase 4."
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Presentation:**
|
||||
|
||||
If Codex ran:
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
SECOND OPINION (Codex):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
@@ -317,10 +326,18 @@ SECOND OPINION (Codex):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Cross-model synthesis:** After presenting Codex output, provide 3-5 bullet synthesis:
|
||||
- Where Claude agrees with Codex
|
||||
If Claude subagent ran:
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
SECOND OPINION (Claude subagent):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
<full subagent output, verbatim — do not truncate or summarize>
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Cross-model synthesis:** After presenting the second opinion output, provide 3-5 bullet synthesis:
|
||||
- Where Claude agrees with the second opinion
|
||||
- Where Claude disagrees and why
|
||||
- Whether Codex's challenged premise changes Claude's recommendation
|
||||
- Whether the challenged premise changes Claude's recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Premise revision check:** If Codex challenged an agreed premise, use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -986,12 +986,18 @@ describe('CODEX_SECOND_OPINION resolver', () => {
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
test('contains opt-in AskUserQuestion text', () => {
|
||||
expect(content).toContain('second opinion from a different AI model');
|
||||
expect(content).toContain('second opinion from an independent AI perspective');
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
test('contains cross-model synthesis instructions', () => {
|
||||
expect(content).toMatch(/[Ss]ynthesis/);
|
||||
expect(content).toContain('Where Claude agrees with Codex');
|
||||
expect(content).toContain('Where Claude agrees with the second opinion');
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
test('contains Claude subagent fallback', () => {
|
||||
expect(content).toContain('CODEX_NOT_AVAILABLE');
|
||||
expect(content).toContain('Agent tool');
|
||||
expect(content).toContain('SECOND OPINION (Claude subagent)');
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
test('contains premise revision check', () => {
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user