mcpField
C
codex-plan-review

codex-plan-review

github.com/tsmuraTesting & quality037 installsUpdated 14w ago
Repository

About codex-plan-review

A workflow for adversarial review of implementation plans using Claude as planner and Codex CLI as a read-only critic. It bounds review rounds, records the discussion, and leaves implementation behind a final human decision.

Key features

  1. 01Uses Codex CLI as a read-only reviewer
  2. 02Maintains a persistent review session
  3. 03Caps the number of review rounds
  4. 04Logs critiques and plan revisions
  5. 05Requires human approval before implementation

Use cases

  1. 01Reviewing plans for high-stakes changes
  2. 02Finding concrete gaps before implementation
  3. 03Tracking disagreements between planner and critic
  4. 04Deciding whether to proceed after bounded review

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/tsmura/grill-me-codex --skill codex-plan-review

After installing, type/codex-plan-reviewin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

Codex-Plan-Review — Adversarial Plan-Review Loop

Two models, one plan, a bounded argument. Claude is the builder and orchestrator. Codex is a read-only critic that can read the repo and the plan but cannot touch a single file. They communicate strictly through PLAN_FILE + a Codex session that persists across rounds. The human enters at exactly two points: kickoff and final sign-off.

This is a deliberate, high-stakes tool — reach for it on auth, data models, concurrency, migrations, payments, anything expensive to get wrong. Skip it for obvious/cheap work.

Prerequisites (verify once, fast)

  • Codex CLI installed and recent: codex --version (need ≥ 0.130; the default gpt-5.5 model errors on older CLIs).
  • Codex authenticated: a prior codex login (ChatGPT account is fine). If a run returns an auth/model error, surface it to the user — do not silently retry.
  • Do NOT pin -m unless the user asks. The user's ~/.codex/config.toml default model is used. Pinning gpt-5.x-codex variants fails on ChatGPT-account auth.
  • Echo the active model before Round 1 so the user can confirm: read the model line from ~/.codex/config.toml (absent = "CLI default"); state it with the resolved tunables. If the user objects, stop before burning a round.
  • Sandbox flag differs between the two commands. codex exec accepts -s read-only. codex exec resume does NOT — it rejects -s ("unexpected argument"). On resume you MUST force read-only via -c sandbox_mode="read-only", because config.toml may default sandbox_mode to danger-full-access (+ approval_policy="never") — which would let Codex WRITE files mid-loop. This is the single most important safety detail in this skill: verified end-to-end on 2026-06-04.

Tunable variables (read from skill args, else default)

VarDefaultMeaning
MAX_ROUNDS5Hard cap on review rounds. The loop ALWAYS terminates at this.
PLAN_FILEPLAN.mdWhere the evolving plan lives. The default is the repo root; a repo with a plans convention should pass its own per-effort path.
LOG_FILEPLAN-REVIEW-LOG.mdAppend-only transcript of the argument (every round's critique + what changed). The artifact.

If the user invoked the skill with an argument like rounds=3, use that for MAX_ROUNDS. Echo the resolved values back before starting.

Resolve PLAN_FILE / LOG_FILE before writing or reviewing anything, record both in the log header, and substitute the resolved paths into every prompt below — placeholders like <PLAN_FILE> are for you to fill in, never strings to send verbatim. A run that passes an override but leaves the literal PLAN.md in the reviewer prompt makes Codex review whatever stale file sits at that path, and it can return VERDICT: APPROVED on the wrong document.

Flow

Step 0 — Kickoff (human gate #1)

The invocation itself is the kickoff. Confirm scope in one line: what is being planned. If the user gave no task, ask for it (one question). Then proceed — do NOT ask for approval round-by-round; that comes at the end.

Step 1 — Claude plans

Do real planning: read the relevant code, think through the approach, surface decisions and tradeoffs. Then write the plan to PLAN_FILE in this structure:

# Plan: <task>
_Round 0 — initial draft by Claude_

## Goal
<one paragraph>

## Approach
<numbered steps, concrete>

## Key decisions & tradeoffs
<the contestable choices — name them explicitly so Codex has something to bite>

## Risks / open questions
<what you're unsure about>

## Out of scope
<bounds>

Initialize LOG_FILE:

# Plan Review Log: <task>
Started <stamp the user's local time if known, else "session start">. MAX_ROUNDS=<n>.

Show the user the plan inline and say you're sending it to Codex for adversarial review.

Step 2 — The loop

Maintain ROUND (start 1) and THREAD_ID (empty until round 1 returns).

The review prompt sent to Codex each round (adjust the task line):

You are an adversarial reviewer for an implementation plan. Be skeptical and specific — your job is to find what breaks, not to be agreeable. Read the plan at <PLAN_FILE> (and any repo files you need; you are read-only). Identify concrete flaws: security holes, race conditions, missing edge cases, schema conflicts, wrong assumptions, observability gaps, simpler alternatives. For each, give a one-line fix. Do NOT modify any files. End your reply with EXACTLY one line: VERDICT: APPROVED if the plan is sound enough to implement, or VERDICT: REVISE if it still has material problems.

Round 1 (creates the session — capture thread_id):

codex exec -s read-only --json \
  -o /tmp/codex-verdict.txt \
  "$(cat REVIEW_PROMPT)" \
  < /dev/null 2>/dev/null | grep '"type":"thread.started"'

Parse thread_id from the {"type":"thread.started","thread_id":"..."} line → that is THREAD_ID. The critique text lands in /tmp/codex-verdict.txt (Codex's last message). Read that file.

Note: stderr carries cosmetic MCP/auth noise on some setups — 2>/dev/null is intentional. Confirm success by the presence of the verdict file + a thread.started line. If neither appears, the run failed (auth/model) — stop and tell the user.

< /dev/null is mandatory: codex exec reads stdin in addition to the prompt arg, so under a non-interactive driver (Claude Code's Bash tool, CI, any non-TTY pipeline) it blocks forever waiting on stdin EOF — a silent ~0% CPU hang. The redirect gives it immediate EOF. Required on the resume call below too.

Timeout guard: run every codex exec / codex exec resume with a 10-minute ceiling so any future stall fails loud instead of hanging silently. Via Claude Code's Bash tool, pass timeout: 600000 on the tool call (the default 2-minute tool timeout is too short for real reviews and would kill them mid-run). In a plain shell, prefix the command with timeout 600 (Linux / Git Bash) or gtimeout 600 (macOS via coreutils — stock macOS has no timeout). If the ceiling trips, treat it as a failed run: stop and tell the user rather than retrying blind. Applies to the resume call below too.

Rounds 2..MAX (resume the SAME session — Codex remembers its earlier critiques, won't re-litigate settled points):

# NOTE: resume rejects -s. Force read-only via -c sandbox_mode, or Codex
# inherits config.toml (possibly danger-full-access) and could write files.
codex exec resume "$THREAD_ID" -c sandbox_mode="read-only" --json \
  -o /tmp/codex-verdict.txt \
  "I revised the plan. Re-review <PLAN_FILE>. Same rules. End with VERDICT: APPROVED or VERDICT: REVISE." \
  < /dev/null 2>/dev/null >/dev/null

Both codex exec and codex exec resume support --json (stream → parse thread_id first round) and -o/--output-last-message (verdict capture).

Each round, after Codex returns:

  1. Read /tmp/codex-verdict.txt. Append to LOG_FILE: ## Round <n> — Codex + the full critique.
  2. Grep the last line for the verdict token.
    • VERDICT: APPROVED → break the loop, go to Step 3 (converged).
    • VERDICT: REVISE → Claude reads the critique, decides what's actually worth acting on (Claude has final say — Codex advises, it does not command). Revise PLAN_FILE. Append to LOG_FILE: ### Claude's response + what you changed and what you rejected and why. Increment ROUND.
  3. If ROUND > MAX_ROUNDS → break to Step 3 (deadlock).
Step 3 — Resolution (human gate #2)

If APPROVED: Present to the user — the final PLAN_FILE, a 3-bullet summary of what the argument improved, and the round count. Ask: "Plan survived N rounds of Codex. Implement it now — Codex builds it (/codex-build), Claude builds it, or stop here?" Only on a yes is code written. No code is written during the loop. If the user picks Codex, invoke the codex-build skill with SPEC_FILE=<PLAN_FILE> and the same LOG_FILE — roles flip (Codex writes, Claude reviews the diff) and the build rounds append to the same log.

If MAX_ROUNDS hit without APPROVED (deadlock): Do NOT pretend it converged. Surface the unresolved disagreements explicitly: list each point Codex still flags and Claude's counter-position. Hand it to the human to break the tie. This is a legitimate, useful outcome — a flagged disagreement beats a false "approved."

Hard rules

  • Codex is read-only EVERY round — -s read-only for the first call, -c sandbox_mode="read-only" for every resume (resume has no -s). It never writes. If you're tempted to give it write access, stop — that's a different skill.
  • The loop ALWAYS terminates at MAX_ROUNDS. No unbounded recursion.
  • Claude is the final arbiter on every REVISE — incorporate good critiques, reject bad ones with a reason logged. Don't cave to Codex on everything (that defeats the cross-model check) and don't ignore it (that defeats the point).
  • Code only after human gate #2.
  • LOG_FILE is the deliverable — it tells the whole story of the argument. Keep it complete.

What NOT to do

  • Don't use this to review existing code — that's /codex-code-review or /codex:review.
  • Don't pin a -codex model variant on ChatGPT-account auth — it 400s.
  • Don't skip the log — the argument transcript is the most valuable artifact.
  • Don't let Codex edit files. Read-only, always.

Comments

Markdown supported