Codex Plan Review (Iterative)

Send the current implementation plan to OpenAI Codex for review. Claude revises the plan based on Codex's feedback and re-submits until Codex approves. Max 5 rounds.

---

When to Invoke

• When the user runs /codex-review:plan during or after plan mode
• When the user wants a second opinion on a plan from a different model

Agent Instructions

When invoked, perform the following iterative review loop:

Step 1: Generate Session ID

Generate a unique ID to avoid conflicts with other concurrent Claude Code sessions:

REVIEW_ID=$(uuidgen | tr '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]' | head -c 8)

Use this for all temp file paths: /tmp/claude-plan-${REVIEW_ID}.md and /tmp/codex-review-${REVIEW_ID}.md.

Step 2: Capture the Plan

Write the current plan to the session-scoped temporary file. The plan is whatever implementation plan exists in the current conversation context (from plan mode, or a plan discussed in chat).

1. Write the full plan content to /tmp/claude-plan-${REVIEW_ID}.md
2. If there is no plan in the current context, ask the user what they want reviewed

Step 3: Initial Review (Round 1)

Run Codex CLI in non-interactive mode to review the plan:

codex exec \
  -m gpt-5.3-codex \
  -s read-only \
  -o /tmp/codex-review-${REVIEW_ID}.md \
  "Review the implementation plan in /tmp/claude-plan-${REVIEW_ID}.md. Focus on:
1. Correctness - Will this plan achieve the stated goals?
2. Risks - What could go wrong? Edge cases? Data loss?
3. Missing steps - Is anything forgotten?
4. Alternatives - Is there a simpler or better approach?
5. Security - Any security concerns?

Be specific and actionable. If the plan is solid and ready to implement, end your review with exactly: VERDICT: APPROVED

If changes are needed, end with exactly: VERDICT: REVISE"

Capture the Codex session ID from the output line that says session id: <uuid>. Store this as CODEX_SESSION_ID. You MUST use this exact ID to resume in subsequent rounds (do NOT use --last, which would grab the wrong session if multiple reviews are running concurrently).

Notes:

• Use -m gpt-5.3-codex as the default model (configured in ~/.codex/config.toml). If the user specifies a different model (e.g., /codex-review:plan o4-mini), use that instead.
• Use -s read-only so Codex can read the codebase for context but cannot modify anything.
• Use -o to capture the output to a file for reliable reading.
• Do NOT pipe the command through tail or any other filter — let the full output be visible so the user can see Codex's progress.
• Set a timeout of at least 10 minutes (600000ms) for the Bash tool call, as Codex reviews can take a while.

Step 4: Read Review & Check Verdict

1. Read /tmp/codex-review-${REVIEW_ID}.md
2. Present Codex's review to the user:

## Codex Review -- Round N (model: gpt-5.3-codex)

[Codex's feedback here]

3. Check the verdict:
   • If VERDICT: APPROVED -> go to Step 7 (Done)
   • If VERDICT: REVISE -> go to Step 5 (Revise & Re-submit)
   • If no clear verdict but feedback is all positive / no actionable items -> treat as approved
   • If max rounds (5) reached -> go to Step 7 with a note that max rounds hit

Step 5: Revise the Plan

Based on Codex's feedback:

1. Revise the plan -- address each issue Codex raised. Update the plan content in the conversation context and rewrite /tmp/claude-plan-${REVIEW_ID}.md with the revised version.
2. Briefly summarize what you changed for the user:

### Revisions (Round N)
- [What was changed and why, one bullet per Codex issue addressed]

3. Inform the user what's happening: "Sending revised plan back to Codex for re-review..."

Step 6: Re-submit to Codex (Rounds 2-5)

Resume the existing Codex session so it has full context of the prior review:

codex exec resume ${CODEX_SESSION_ID} \
  "I've revised the plan based on your feedback. The updated plan is in /tmp/claude-plan-${REVIEW_ID}.md.

Here's what I changed:
[List the specific changes made]

Please re-review. If the plan is now solid and ready to implement, end with: VERDICT: APPROVED
If more changes are needed, end with: VERDICT: REVISE"

Note: codex exec resume does NOT support -o flag. Read the Codex response directly from stdout. Do NOT pipe through tail or any filter — show full output. Set a timeout of at least 10 minutes (600000ms).

Then go back to Step 4 (Read Review & Check Verdict).

Important: If resume ${CODEX_SESSION_ID} fails (e.g., session expired), fall back to a fresh codex exec call with context about the prior rounds included in the prompt.

Step 7: Present Final Result

Once approved (or max rounds reached):

## Codex Review -- Final (model: gpt-5.3-codex)

**Status:** Approved after N round(s)

[Final Codex feedback / approval message]

---
**The plan has been reviewed and approved by Codex. Ready for your approval to implement.**

If max rounds were reached without approval:

## Codex Review -- Final (model: gpt-5.3-codex)

**Status:** Max rounds (5) reached -- not fully approved

**Remaining concerns:**
[List unresolved issues from last review]

---
**Codex still has concerns. Review the remaining items and decide whether to proceed or continue refining.**

Step 8: Cleanup

Remove the session-scoped temporary files:

rm -f /tmp/claude-plan-${REVIEW_ID}.md /tmp/codex-review-${REVIEW_ID}.md

Loop Summary

Round 1: Claude sends plan -> Codex reviews -> REVISE?
Round 2: Claude revises -> Codex re-reviews (resume session) -> REVISE?
Round 3: Claude revises -> Codex re-reviews (resume session) -> APPROVED

Max 5 rounds. Each round preserves Codex's conversation context via session resume.

Rules

• Claude actively revises the plan based on Codex feedback between rounds -- this is NOT just passing messages, Claude should make real improvements
• Default model is gpt-5.3-codex. Accept model override from the user's arguments (e.g., /codex-review:plan o4-mini)
• Always use read-only sandbox mode -- Codex should never write files
• Max 5 review rounds to prevent infinite loops
• Show the user each round's feedback and revisions so they can follow along
• If Codex CLI is not installed or fails, inform the user and suggest npm install -g @openai/codex
• If a revision contradicts the user's explicit requirements, skip that revision and note it for the user