mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-05-02 11:45:20 +02:00
feat: /codex skill — multi-AI second opinion (review, challenge, consult)
Three modes: code review with pass/fail gate, adversarial challenge mode, and conversational consult with session continuity. First multi-AI skill in gstack, wrapping OpenAI's Codex CLI.
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
+445
@@ -0,0 +1,445 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: codex
|
||||
version: 1.0.0
|
||||
description: |
|
||||
OpenAI Codex CLI wrapper — three modes. Code review: independent diff review via
|
||||
codex review with pass/fail gate. Challenge: adversarial mode that tries to break
|
||||
your code. Consult: ask codex anything with session continuity for follow-ups.
|
||||
The "200 IQ autistic developer" second opinion. Use when asked to "codex review",
|
||||
"codex challenge", "ask codex", "second opinion", or "consult codex".
|
||||
allowed-tools:
|
||||
- Bash
|
||||
- Read
|
||||
- Write
|
||||
- Glob
|
||||
- Grep
|
||||
- AskUserQuestion
|
||||
---
|
||||
<!-- AUTO-GENERATED from SKILL.md.tmpl — do not edit directly -->
|
||||
<!-- Regenerate: bun run gen:skill-docs -->
|
||||
|
||||
## Preamble (run first)
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
_UPD=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-update-check 2>/dev/null || .claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-update-check 2>/dev/null || true)
|
||||
[ -n "$_UPD" ] && echo "$_UPD" || true
|
||||
mkdir -p ~/.gstack/sessions
|
||||
touch ~/.gstack/sessions/"$PPID"
|
||||
_SESSIONS=$(find ~/.gstack/sessions -mmin -120 -type f 2>/dev/null | wc -l | tr -d ' ')
|
||||
find ~/.gstack/sessions -mmin +120 -type f -delete 2>/dev/null || true
|
||||
_CONTRIB=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get gstack_contributor 2>/dev/null || true)
|
||||
_BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
|
||||
echo "BRANCH: $_BRANCH"
|
||||
_LAKE_SEEN=$([ -f ~/.gstack/.completeness-intro-seen ] && echo "yes" || echo "no")
|
||||
echo "LAKE_INTRO: $_LAKE_SEEN"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If output shows `UPGRADE_AVAILABLE <old> <new>`: read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/gstack-upgrade/SKILL.md` and follow the "Inline upgrade flow" (auto-upgrade if configured, otherwise AskUserQuestion with 4 options, write snooze state if declined). If `JUST_UPGRADED <from> <to>`: tell user "Running gstack v{to} (just updated!)" and continue.
|
||||
|
||||
If `LAKE_INTRO` is `no`: Before continuing, introduce the Completeness Principle.
|
||||
Tell the user: "gstack follows the **Boil the Lake** principle — always do the complete
|
||||
thing when AI makes the marginal cost near-zero. Read more: https://garryslist.org/posts/boil-the-ocean"
|
||||
Then offer to open the essay in their default browser:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
open https://garryslist.org/posts/boil-the-ocean
|
||||
touch ~/.gstack/.completeness-intro-seen
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Only run `open` if the user says yes. Always run `touch` to mark as seen. This only happens once.
|
||||
|
||||
## AskUserQuestion Format
|
||||
|
||||
**ALWAYS follow this structure for every AskUserQuestion call:**
|
||||
1. **Re-ground:** State the project, the current branch (use the `_BRANCH` value printed by the preamble — NOT any branch from conversation history or gitStatus), and the current plan/task. (1-2 sentences)
|
||||
2. **Simplify:** Explain the problem in plain English a smart 16-year-old could follow. No raw function names, no internal jargon, no implementation details. Use concrete examples and analogies. Say what it DOES, not what it's called.
|
||||
3. **Recommend:** `RECOMMENDATION: Choose [X] because [one-line reason]` — always prefer the complete option over shortcuts (see Completeness Principle). Include `Completeness: X/10` for each option. Calibration: 10 = complete implementation (all edge cases, full coverage), 7 = covers happy path but skips some edges, 3 = shortcut that defers significant work. If both options are 8+, pick the higher; if one is ≤5, flag it.
|
||||
4. **Options:** Lettered options: `A) ... B) ... C) ...` — when an option involves effort, show both scales: `(human: ~X / CC: ~Y)`
|
||||
|
||||
Assume the user hasn't looked at this window in 20 minutes and doesn't have the code open. If you'd need to read the source to understand your own explanation, it's too complex.
|
||||
|
||||
Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseline.
|
||||
|
||||
## Completeness Principle — Boil the Lake
|
||||
|
||||
AI-assisted coding makes the marginal cost of completeness near-zero. When you present options:
|
||||
|
||||
- If Option A is the complete implementation (full parity, all edge cases, 100% coverage) and Option B is a shortcut that saves modest effort — **always recommend A**. The delta between 80 lines and 150 lines is meaningless with CC+gstack. "Good enough" is the wrong instinct when "complete" costs minutes more.
|
||||
- **Lake vs. ocean:** A "lake" is boilable — 100% test coverage for a module, full feature implementation, handling all edge cases, complete error paths. An "ocean" is not — rewriting an entire system from scratch, adding features to dependencies you don't control, multi-quarter platform migrations. Recommend boiling lakes. Flag oceans as out of scope.
|
||||
- **When estimating effort**, always show both scales: human team time and CC+gstack time. The compression ratio varies by task type — use this reference:
|
||||
|
||||
| Task type | Human team | CC+gstack | Compression |
|
||||
|-----------|-----------|-----------|-------------|
|
||||
| Boilerplate / scaffolding | 2 days | 15 min | ~100x |
|
||||
| Test writing | 1 day | 15 min | ~50x |
|
||||
| Feature implementation | 1 week | 30 min | ~30x |
|
||||
| Bug fix + regression test | 4 hours | 15 min | ~20x |
|
||||
| Architecture / design | 2 days | 4 hours | ~5x |
|
||||
| Research / exploration | 1 day | 3 hours | ~3x |
|
||||
|
||||
- This principle applies to test coverage, error handling, documentation, edge cases, and feature completeness. Don't skip the last 10% to "save time" — with AI, that 10% costs seconds.
|
||||
|
||||
**Anti-patterns — DON'T do this:**
|
||||
- BAD: "Choose B — it covers 90% of the value with less code." (If A is only 70 lines more, choose A.)
|
||||
- BAD: "We can skip edge case handling to save time." (Edge case handling costs minutes with CC.)
|
||||
- BAD: "Let's defer test coverage to a follow-up PR." (Tests are the cheapest lake to boil.)
|
||||
- BAD: Quoting only human-team effort: "This would take 2 weeks." (Say: "2 weeks human / ~1 hour CC.")
|
||||
|
||||
## Contributor Mode
|
||||
|
||||
If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
|
||||
|
||||
**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
|
||||
|
||||
**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, `$B js "await fetch(...)"` used to fail with `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
|
||||
|
||||
**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
|
||||
|
||||
**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
# {Title}
|
||||
|
||||
Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
|
||||
|
||||
**What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
|
||||
**What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
|
||||
**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
|
||||
|
||||
## Steps to reproduce
|
||||
1. {step}
|
||||
|
||||
## Raw output
|
||||
```
|
||||
{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## What would make this a 10
|
||||
{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
|
||||
|
||||
**Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-js-no-await`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
|
||||
|
||||
## Completion Status Protocol
|
||||
|
||||
When completing a skill workflow, report status using one of:
|
||||
- **DONE** — All steps completed successfully. Evidence provided for each claim.
|
||||
- **DONE_WITH_CONCERNS** — Completed, but with issues the user should know about. List each concern.
|
||||
- **BLOCKED** — Cannot proceed. State what is blocking and what was tried.
|
||||
- **NEEDS_CONTEXT** — Missing information required to continue. State exactly what you need.
|
||||
|
||||
### Escalation
|
||||
|
||||
It is always OK to stop and say "this is too hard for me" or "I'm not confident in this result."
|
||||
|
||||
Bad work is worse than no work. You will not be penalized for escalating.
|
||||
- If you have attempted a task 3 times without success, STOP and escalate.
|
||||
- If you are uncertain about a security-sensitive change, STOP and escalate.
|
||||
- If the scope of work exceeds what you can verify, STOP and escalate.
|
||||
|
||||
Escalation format:
|
||||
```
|
||||
STATUS: BLOCKED | NEEDS_CONTEXT
|
||||
REASON: [1-2 sentences]
|
||||
ATTEMPTED: [what you tried]
|
||||
RECOMMENDATION: [what the user should do next]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 0: Detect base branch
|
||||
|
||||
Determine which branch this PR targets. Use the result as "the base branch" in all subsequent steps.
|
||||
|
||||
1. Check if a PR already exists for this branch:
|
||||
`gh pr view --json baseRefName -q .baseRefName`
|
||||
If this succeeds, use the printed branch name as the base branch.
|
||||
|
||||
2. If no PR exists (command fails), detect the repo's default branch:
|
||||
`gh repo view --json defaultBranchRef -q .defaultBranchRef.name`
|
||||
|
||||
3. If both commands fail, fall back to `main`.
|
||||
|
||||
Print the detected base branch name. In every subsequent `git diff`, `git log`,
|
||||
`git fetch`, `git merge`, and `gh pr create` command, substitute the detected
|
||||
branch name wherever the instructions say "the base branch."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# /codex — Multi-AI Second Opinion
|
||||
|
||||
You are running the `/codex` skill. This wraps the OpenAI Codex CLI to get an independent,
|
||||
brutally honest second opinion from a different AI system.
|
||||
|
||||
Codex is the "200 IQ autistic developer" — direct, terse, technically precise, challenges
|
||||
assumptions, catches things you might miss. Present its output faithfully, not summarized.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 0: Check codex binary
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
CODEX_BIN=$(which codex 2>/dev/null || echo "")
|
||||
[ -z "$CODEX_BIN" ] && echo "NOT_FOUND" || echo "FOUND: $CODEX_BIN"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If `NOT_FOUND`: stop and tell the user:
|
||||
"Codex CLI not found. Install it: `npm install -g @openai/codex` or see https://github.com/openai/codex"
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 1: Detect mode
|
||||
|
||||
Parse the user's input to determine which mode to run:
|
||||
|
||||
1. `/codex review` or `/codex review <instructions>` — **Review mode** (Step 2A)
|
||||
2. `/codex challenge` or `/codex challenge <focus>` — **Challenge mode** (Step 2B)
|
||||
3. `/codex` with no arguments — **Auto-detect:**
|
||||
- Check for a diff: `git diff origin/<base> --stat 2>/dev/null | tail -1`
|
||||
- If a diff exists, use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Codex detected changes against the base branch. What should it do?
|
||||
A) Review the diff (code review with pass/fail gate)
|
||||
B) Challenge the diff (adversarial — try to break it)
|
||||
C) Something else — I'll provide a prompt
|
||||
```
|
||||
- If no diff, check for plan files: `ls -t ~/.claude/plans/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1`
|
||||
- If a plan file exists, offer to review it
|
||||
- Otherwise, ask: "What would you like to ask Codex?"
|
||||
4. `/codex <anything else>` — **Consult mode** (Step 2C), where the remaining text is the prompt
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 2A: Review Mode
|
||||
|
||||
Run Codex code review against the current branch diff.
|
||||
|
||||
1. Create temp files for output capture:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
TMPERR=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-err-XXXXXX.txt)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
2. Run the review (5-minute timeout):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex review --base <base> 2>"$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Use `timeout: 300000` on the Bash call. If the user provided custom instructions
|
||||
(e.g., `/codex review focus on security`), pass them as the prompt argument:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex review "focus on security" --base <base> 2>"$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
3. Capture the output. Then parse cost from stderr:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
grep "tokens used" "$TMPERR" 2>/dev/null || echo "tokens: unknown"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
4. Determine gate verdict by checking the review output for critical findings.
|
||||
If the output contains `[P1]` — the gate is **FAIL**.
|
||||
If no `[P1]` markers are found (only `[P2]` or no findings) — the gate is **PASS**.
|
||||
|
||||
5. Present the output:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
CODEX SAYS (code review):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
<full codex output, verbatim — do not truncate or summarize>
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
GATE: PASS Tokens: 14,331 | Est. cost: ~$0.12
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
or
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
GATE: FAIL (N critical findings)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Cross-model comparison:** If `/review` (Claude's own review) was already run
|
||||
earlier in this conversation, compare the two sets of findings:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
CROSS-MODEL ANALYSIS:
|
||||
Both found: [findings that overlap between Claude and Codex]
|
||||
Only Codex found: [findings unique to Codex]
|
||||
Only Claude found: [findings unique to Claude's /review]
|
||||
Agreement rate: X% (N/M total unique findings overlap)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
7. Persist the review result:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
|
||||
BRANCH_SLUG=$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD 2>/dev/null | tr '/' '-')
|
||||
mkdir -p ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG
|
||||
echo '{"skill":"codex-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","gate":"GATE","findings":N}' >> ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH_SLUG-reviews.jsonl
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Substitute: TIMESTAMP (ISO 8601), STATUS ("clean" if PASS, "issues_found" if FAIL),
|
||||
GATE ("pass" or "fail"), findings (count of [P1] + [P2] markers).
|
||||
|
||||
8. Clean up temp files:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
rm -f "$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 2B: Challenge (Adversarial) Mode
|
||||
|
||||
Codex tries to break your code — finding edge cases, race conditions, security holes,
|
||||
and failure modes that a normal review would miss.
|
||||
|
||||
1. Create temp files:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
TMPRESP=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-resp-XXXXXX.txt)
|
||||
TMPERR=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-err-XXXXXX.txt)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
2. Construct the adversarial prompt. If the user provided a focus area
|
||||
(e.g., `/codex challenge security`), include it:
|
||||
|
||||
Default prompt (no focus):
|
||||
"Review the changes on this branch against the base branch. Run `git diff origin/<base>` to see the diff. Your job is to find ways this code will fail in production. Think like an attacker and a chaos engineer. Find edge cases, race conditions, security holes, resource leaks, failure modes, and silent data corruption paths. Be adversarial. Be thorough. No compliments — just the problems."
|
||||
|
||||
With focus (e.g., "security"):
|
||||
"Review the changes on this branch against the base branch. Run `git diff origin/<base>` to see the diff. Focus specifically on SECURITY. Your job is to find every way an attacker could exploit this code. Think about injection vectors, auth bypasses, privilege escalation, data exposure, and timing attacks. Be adversarial."
|
||||
|
||||
3. Run codex exec (5-minute timeout):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex exec "<prompt>" -s read-only -o "$TMPRESP" 2>"$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
4. Read the response and parse cost:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
cat "$TMPRESP"
|
||||
grep "tokens used" "$TMPERR" 2>/dev/null || echo "tokens: unknown"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
5. Present:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
CODEX SAYS (adversarial challenge):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
<full response from $TMPRESP, verbatim>
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
Tokens: N | Est. cost: ~$X.XX
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
6. Clean up: `rm -f "$TMPRESP" "$TMPERR"`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 2C: Consult Mode
|
||||
|
||||
Ask Codex anything about the codebase. Supports session continuity for follow-ups.
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Check for existing session:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
cat .context/codex-session-id 2>/dev/null || echo "NO_SESSION"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If a session file exists (not `NO_SESSION`), use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
```
|
||||
You have an active Codex conversation from earlier. Continue it or start fresh?
|
||||
A) Continue the conversation (Codex remembers the prior context)
|
||||
B) Start a new conversation
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
2. Create temp files:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
TMPRESP=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-resp-XXXXXX.txt)
|
||||
TMPERR=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-err-XXXXXX.txt)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Plan review auto-detection:** If the user's prompt is about reviewing a plan,
|
||||
or if plan files exist and the user said `/codex` with no arguments:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
ls -t ~/.claude/plans/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1
|
||||
```
|
||||
Read the plan file and prepend the persona to the user's prompt:
|
||||
"You are a brutally honest technical reviewer. Review this plan for: logical gaps and
|
||||
unstated assumptions, missing error handling or edge cases, overcomplexity (is there a
|
||||
simpler approach?), feasibility risks (what could go wrong?), and missing dependencies
|
||||
or sequencing issues. Be direct. Be terse. No compliments. Just the problems.
|
||||
|
||||
THE PLAN:
|
||||
<plan content>"
|
||||
|
||||
4. Run codex exec (5-minute timeout):
|
||||
|
||||
For a **new session:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex exec "<prompt>" -s read-only -o "$TMPRESP" 2>"$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
For a **resumed session** (user chose "Continue"):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex exec resume <session-id> "<prompt>" -s read-only -o "$TMPRESP" 2>"$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
5. Capture and save session ID:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
SESSION_ID=$(grep "session id:" "$TMPERR" | head -1 | awk '{print $3}')
|
||||
[ -n "$SESSION_ID" ] && mkdir -p .context && echo "$SESSION_ID" > .context/codex-session-id
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
6. Read response and parse cost:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
cat "$TMPRESP"
|
||||
grep "tokens used" "$TMPERR" 2>/dev/null || echo "tokens: unknown"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
7. Present:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
CODEX SAYS (consult):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
<full response from $TMPRESP, verbatim>
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
Tokens: N | Est. cost: ~$X.XX
|
||||
Session saved — run /codex again to continue this conversation.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
8. After presenting, note any points where Codex's analysis differs from your own
|
||||
understanding. If there is a disagreement, flag it:
|
||||
"Note: Claude Code disagrees on X because Y."
|
||||
|
||||
9. Clean up: `rm -f "$TMPRESP" "$TMPERR"`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Cost Estimation
|
||||
|
||||
Parse token count from stderr. Codex prints `tokens used\nN` to stderr.
|
||||
Estimate cost based on the model:
|
||||
- gpt-5.2-codex: ~$0.008 per 1K tokens (estimate)
|
||||
- o3: ~$0.01 per 1K tokens (estimate)
|
||||
|
||||
Display as: `Tokens: N | Est. cost: ~$X.XX`
|
||||
|
||||
If token count is not available, display: `Tokens: unknown`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Error Handling
|
||||
|
||||
- **Binary not found:** Detected in Step 0. Stop with install instructions.
|
||||
- **API key missing:** Codex prints an auth error to stderr. Surface the error:
|
||||
"Codex authentication failed. Set OPENAI_API_KEY in your environment."
|
||||
- **Timeout:** If the Bash call times out (5 min), tell the user:
|
||||
"Codex timed out after 5 minutes. The diff may be too large or the API may be slow. Try again or use a smaller scope."
|
||||
- **Empty response:** If `$TMPRESP` is empty or doesn't exist, tell the user:
|
||||
"Codex returned no response. Check stderr for errors."
|
||||
- **Session resume failure:** If resume fails, delete the session file and start fresh.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Important Rules
|
||||
|
||||
- **Never modify files.** This skill is read-only. Codex runs in read-only sandbox mode.
|
||||
- **Present output verbatim.** Do not truncate, summarize, or editorialize Codex's output
|
||||
before showing it. Show it in full inside the CODEX SAYS block.
|
||||
- **Add synthesis after, not instead of.** Any Claude commentary comes after the full output.
|
||||
- **5-minute timeout** on all Bash calls to codex (`timeout: 300000`).
|
||||
- **No double-reviewing.** If the user already ran `/review`, Codex provides a second
|
||||
independent opinion. Do not re-run Claude Code's own review.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,299 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: codex
|
||||
version: 1.0.0
|
||||
description: |
|
||||
OpenAI Codex CLI wrapper — three modes. Code review: independent diff review via
|
||||
codex review with pass/fail gate. Challenge: adversarial mode that tries to break
|
||||
your code. Consult: ask codex anything with session continuity for follow-ups.
|
||||
The "200 IQ autistic developer" second opinion. Use when asked to "codex review",
|
||||
"codex challenge", "ask codex", "second opinion", or "consult codex".
|
||||
allowed-tools:
|
||||
- Bash
|
||||
- Read
|
||||
- Write
|
||||
- Glob
|
||||
- Grep
|
||||
- AskUserQuestion
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
{{PREAMBLE}}
|
||||
|
||||
{{BASE_BRANCH_DETECT}}
|
||||
|
||||
# /codex — Multi-AI Second Opinion
|
||||
|
||||
You are running the `/codex` skill. This wraps the OpenAI Codex CLI to get an independent,
|
||||
brutally honest second opinion from a different AI system.
|
||||
|
||||
Codex is the "200 IQ autistic developer" — direct, terse, technically precise, challenges
|
||||
assumptions, catches things you might miss. Present its output faithfully, not summarized.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 0: Check codex binary
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
CODEX_BIN=$(which codex 2>/dev/null || echo "")
|
||||
[ -z "$CODEX_BIN" ] && echo "NOT_FOUND" || echo "FOUND: $CODEX_BIN"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If `NOT_FOUND`: stop and tell the user:
|
||||
"Codex CLI not found. Install it: `npm install -g @openai/codex` or see https://github.com/openai/codex"
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 1: Detect mode
|
||||
|
||||
Parse the user's input to determine which mode to run:
|
||||
|
||||
1. `/codex review` or `/codex review <instructions>` — **Review mode** (Step 2A)
|
||||
2. `/codex challenge` or `/codex challenge <focus>` — **Challenge mode** (Step 2B)
|
||||
3. `/codex` with no arguments — **Auto-detect:**
|
||||
- Check for a diff: `git diff origin/<base> --stat 2>/dev/null | tail -1`
|
||||
- If a diff exists, use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Codex detected changes against the base branch. What should it do?
|
||||
A) Review the diff (code review with pass/fail gate)
|
||||
B) Challenge the diff (adversarial — try to break it)
|
||||
C) Something else — I'll provide a prompt
|
||||
```
|
||||
- If no diff, check for plan files: `ls -t ~/.claude/plans/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1`
|
||||
- If a plan file exists, offer to review it
|
||||
- Otherwise, ask: "What would you like to ask Codex?"
|
||||
4. `/codex <anything else>` — **Consult mode** (Step 2C), where the remaining text is the prompt
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 2A: Review Mode
|
||||
|
||||
Run Codex code review against the current branch diff.
|
||||
|
||||
1. Create temp files for output capture:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
TMPERR=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-err-XXXXXX.txt)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
2. Run the review (5-minute timeout):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex review --base <base> 2>"$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Use `timeout: 300000` on the Bash call. If the user provided custom instructions
|
||||
(e.g., `/codex review focus on security`), pass them as the prompt argument:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex review "focus on security" --base <base> 2>"$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
3. Capture the output. Then parse cost from stderr:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
grep "tokens used" "$TMPERR" 2>/dev/null || echo "tokens: unknown"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
4. Determine gate verdict by checking the review output for critical findings.
|
||||
If the output contains `[P1]` — the gate is **FAIL**.
|
||||
If no `[P1]` markers are found (only `[P2]` or no findings) — the gate is **PASS**.
|
||||
|
||||
5. Present the output:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
CODEX SAYS (code review):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
<full codex output, verbatim — do not truncate or summarize>
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
GATE: PASS Tokens: 14,331 | Est. cost: ~$0.12
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
or
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
GATE: FAIL (N critical findings)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Cross-model comparison:** If `/review` (Claude's own review) was already run
|
||||
earlier in this conversation, compare the two sets of findings:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
CROSS-MODEL ANALYSIS:
|
||||
Both found: [findings that overlap between Claude and Codex]
|
||||
Only Codex found: [findings unique to Codex]
|
||||
Only Claude found: [findings unique to Claude's /review]
|
||||
Agreement rate: X% (N/M total unique findings overlap)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
7. Persist the review result:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
|
||||
BRANCH_SLUG=$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD 2>/dev/null | tr '/' '-')
|
||||
mkdir -p ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG
|
||||
echo '{"skill":"codex-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","gate":"GATE","findings":N}' >> ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH_SLUG-reviews.jsonl
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Substitute: TIMESTAMP (ISO 8601), STATUS ("clean" if PASS, "issues_found" if FAIL),
|
||||
GATE ("pass" or "fail"), findings (count of [P1] + [P2] markers).
|
||||
|
||||
8. Clean up temp files:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
rm -f "$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 2B: Challenge (Adversarial) Mode
|
||||
|
||||
Codex tries to break your code — finding edge cases, race conditions, security holes,
|
||||
and failure modes that a normal review would miss.
|
||||
|
||||
1. Create temp files:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
TMPRESP=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-resp-XXXXXX.txt)
|
||||
TMPERR=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-err-XXXXXX.txt)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
2. Construct the adversarial prompt. If the user provided a focus area
|
||||
(e.g., `/codex challenge security`), include it:
|
||||
|
||||
Default prompt (no focus):
|
||||
"Review the changes on this branch against the base branch. Run `git diff origin/<base>` to see the diff. Your job is to find ways this code will fail in production. Think like an attacker and a chaos engineer. Find edge cases, race conditions, security holes, resource leaks, failure modes, and silent data corruption paths. Be adversarial. Be thorough. No compliments — just the problems."
|
||||
|
||||
With focus (e.g., "security"):
|
||||
"Review the changes on this branch against the base branch. Run `git diff origin/<base>` to see the diff. Focus specifically on SECURITY. Your job is to find every way an attacker could exploit this code. Think about injection vectors, auth bypasses, privilege escalation, data exposure, and timing attacks. Be adversarial."
|
||||
|
||||
3. Run codex exec (5-minute timeout):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex exec "<prompt>" -s read-only -o "$TMPRESP" 2>"$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
4. Read the response and parse cost:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
cat "$TMPRESP"
|
||||
grep "tokens used" "$TMPERR" 2>/dev/null || echo "tokens: unknown"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
5. Present:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
CODEX SAYS (adversarial challenge):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
<full response from $TMPRESP, verbatim>
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
Tokens: N | Est. cost: ~$X.XX
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
6. Clean up: `rm -f "$TMPRESP" "$TMPERR"`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 2C: Consult Mode
|
||||
|
||||
Ask Codex anything about the codebase. Supports session continuity for follow-ups.
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Check for existing session:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
cat .context/codex-session-id 2>/dev/null || echo "NO_SESSION"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If a session file exists (not `NO_SESSION`), use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
```
|
||||
You have an active Codex conversation from earlier. Continue it or start fresh?
|
||||
A) Continue the conversation (Codex remembers the prior context)
|
||||
B) Start a new conversation
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
2. Create temp files:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
TMPRESP=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-resp-XXXXXX.txt)
|
||||
TMPERR=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-err-XXXXXX.txt)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Plan review auto-detection:** If the user's prompt is about reviewing a plan,
|
||||
or if plan files exist and the user said `/codex` with no arguments:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
ls -t ~/.claude/plans/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1
|
||||
```
|
||||
Read the plan file and prepend the persona to the user's prompt:
|
||||
"You are a brutally honest technical reviewer. Review this plan for: logical gaps and
|
||||
unstated assumptions, missing error handling or edge cases, overcomplexity (is there a
|
||||
simpler approach?), feasibility risks (what could go wrong?), and missing dependencies
|
||||
or sequencing issues. Be direct. Be terse. No compliments. Just the problems.
|
||||
|
||||
THE PLAN:
|
||||
<plan content>"
|
||||
|
||||
4. Run codex exec (5-minute timeout):
|
||||
|
||||
For a **new session:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex exec "<prompt>" -s read-only -o "$TMPRESP" 2>"$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
For a **resumed session** (user chose "Continue"):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
codex exec resume <session-id> "<prompt>" -s read-only -o "$TMPRESP" 2>"$TMPERR"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
5. Capture and save session ID:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
SESSION_ID=$(grep "session id:" "$TMPERR" | head -1 | awk '{print $3}')
|
||||
[ -n "$SESSION_ID" ] && mkdir -p .context && echo "$SESSION_ID" > .context/codex-session-id
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
6. Read response and parse cost:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
cat "$TMPRESP"
|
||||
grep "tokens used" "$TMPERR" 2>/dev/null || echo "tokens: unknown"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
7. Present:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
CODEX SAYS (consult):
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
<full response from $TMPRESP, verbatim>
|
||||
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||||
Tokens: N | Est. cost: ~$X.XX
|
||||
Session saved — run /codex again to continue this conversation.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
8. After presenting, note any points where Codex's analysis differs from your own
|
||||
understanding. If there is a disagreement, flag it:
|
||||
"Note: Claude Code disagrees on X because Y."
|
||||
|
||||
9. Clean up: `rm -f "$TMPRESP" "$TMPERR"`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Cost Estimation
|
||||
|
||||
Parse token count from stderr. Codex prints `tokens used\nN` to stderr.
|
||||
Estimate cost based on the model:
|
||||
- gpt-5.2-codex: ~$0.008 per 1K tokens (estimate)
|
||||
- o3: ~$0.01 per 1K tokens (estimate)
|
||||
|
||||
Display as: `Tokens: N | Est. cost: ~$X.XX`
|
||||
|
||||
If token count is not available, display: `Tokens: unknown`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Error Handling
|
||||
|
||||
- **Binary not found:** Detected in Step 0. Stop with install instructions.
|
||||
- **API key missing:** Codex prints an auth error to stderr. Surface the error:
|
||||
"Codex authentication failed. Set OPENAI_API_KEY in your environment."
|
||||
- **Timeout:** If the Bash call times out (5 min), tell the user:
|
||||
"Codex timed out after 5 minutes. The diff may be too large or the API may be slow. Try again or use a smaller scope."
|
||||
- **Empty response:** If `$TMPRESP` is empty or doesn't exist, tell the user:
|
||||
"Codex returned no response. Check stderr for errors."
|
||||
- **Session resume failure:** If resume fails, delete the session file and start fresh.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Important Rules
|
||||
|
||||
- **Never modify files.** This skill is read-only. Codex runs in read-only sandbox mode.
|
||||
- **Present output verbatim.** Do not truncate, summarize, or editorialize Codex's output
|
||||
before showing it. Show it in full inside the CODEX SAYS block.
|
||||
- **Add synthesis after, not instead of.** Any Claude commentary comes after the full output.
|
||||
- **5-minute timeout** on all Bash calls to codex (`timeout: 300000`).
|
||||
- **No double-reviewing.** If the user already ran `/review`, Codex provides a second
|
||||
independent opinion. Do not re-run Claude Code's own review.
|
||||
@@ -929,7 +929,7 @@ echo "---CONFIG---"
|
||||
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get skip_eng_review 2>/dev/null || echo "false"
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, plan-eng-review, plan-design-review, design-review-lite). Ignore entries with timestamps older than 7 days. For Design Review, show whichever is more recent between \`plan-design-review\` (full visual audit) and \`design-review-lite\` (code-level check). Append "(FULL)" or "(LITE)" to the status to distinguish. Display:
|
||||
Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, plan-eng-review, plan-design-review, design-review-lite, codex-review). Ignore entries with timestamps older than 7 days. For Design Review, show whichever is more recent between \`plan-design-review\` (full visual audit) and \`design-review-lite\` (code-level check). Append "(FULL)" or "(LITE)" to the status to distinguish. Display:
|
||||
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
+====================================================================+
|
||||
@@ -940,6 +940,7 @@ Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, pl
|
||||
| Eng Review | 1 | 2026-03-16 15:00 | CLEAR | YES |
|
||||
| CEO Review | 0 | — | — | no |
|
||||
| Design Review | 0 | — | — | no |
|
||||
| Codex Review | 0 | — | — | no |
|
||||
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
||||
| VERDICT: CLEARED — Eng Review passed |
|
||||
+====================================================================+
|
||||
@@ -949,11 +950,12 @@ Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, pl
|
||||
- **Eng Review (required by default):** The only review that gates shipping. Covers architecture, code quality, tests, performance. Can be disabled globally with \\\`gstack-config set skip_eng_review true\\\` (the "don't bother me" setting).
|
||||
- **CEO Review (optional):** Use your judgment. Recommend it for big product/business changes, new user-facing features, or scope decisions. Skip for bug fixes, refactors, infra, and cleanup.
|
||||
- **Design Review (optional):** Use your judgment. Recommend it for UI/UX changes. Skip for backend-only, infra, or prompt-only changes.
|
||||
- **Codex Review (optional):** Independent second opinion from OpenAI Codex CLI. Shows pass/fail gate. Recommend for critical code changes where a second AI perspective adds value. Skip when Codex CLI is not installed.
|
||||
|
||||
**Verdict logic:**
|
||||
- **CLEARED**: Eng Review has >= 1 entry within 7 days with status "clean" (or \\\`skip_eng_review\\\` is \\\`true\\\`)
|
||||
- **NOT CLEARED**: Eng Review missing, stale (>7 days), or has open issues
|
||||
- CEO and Design reviews are shown for context but never block shipping
|
||||
- CEO, Design, and Codex reviews are shown for context but never block shipping
|
||||
- If \\\`skip_eng_review\\\` config is \\\`true\\\`, Eng Review shows "SKIPPED (global)" and verdict is CLEARED`;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1182,6 +1184,7 @@ function findTemplates(): string[] {
|
||||
path.join(ROOT, 'design-review', 'SKILL.md.tmpl'),
|
||||
path.join(ROOT, 'design-consultation', 'SKILL.md.tmpl'),
|
||||
path.join(ROOT, 'document-release', 'SKILL.md.tmpl'),
|
||||
path.join(ROOT, 'codex', 'SKILL.md.tmpl'),
|
||||
];
|
||||
for (const p of candidates) {
|
||||
if (fs.existsSync(p)) templates.push(p);
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -73,6 +73,9 @@ export const E2E_TOUCHFILES: Record<string, string[]> = {
|
||||
// Document-release
|
||||
'document-release': ['document-release/**'],
|
||||
|
||||
// Codex
|
||||
'codex-review': ['codex/**'],
|
||||
|
||||
// QA bootstrap
|
||||
'qa-bootstrap': ['qa/**', 'browse/src/**', 'ship/**'],
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -447,6 +447,7 @@ describe('No hardcoded branch names in SKILL templates', () => {
|
||||
'document-release/SKILL.md.tmpl',
|
||||
'plan-eng-review/SKILL.md.tmpl',
|
||||
'plan-design-review/SKILL.md.tmpl',
|
||||
'codex/SKILL.md.tmpl',
|
||||
];
|
||||
|
||||
// Patterns that indicate hardcoded 'main' in git commands
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user