codex-think-about

Use this skill for peer reasoning, not code review. Claude and Codex are equal analytical peers; Claude orchestrates the debate loop and final synthesis.

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "codex-think-about" with this command: npx skills add lploc94/codex_skill/lploc94-codex-skill-codex-think-about

Codex Think About

Purpose

Use this skill for peer reasoning, not code review. Claude and Codex are equal analytical peers; Claude orchestrates the debate loop and final synthesis.

Prerequisites

  • A clear question or decision topic from the user.

  • codex CLI installed and authenticated.

  • codex-review skill pack is installed (npx github:lploc94/codex_skill ).

Runner

RUNNER="{{RUNNER_PATH}}"

Workflow

  • Ask user to choose reasoning effort level: low , medium , high , or xhigh (default: high ). Gather factual context only (no premature opinion). Set EFFORT .

  • Build round-1 prompt from references/prompts.md .

  • Start Codex + Claude Independent Analysis (parallel): a. Start Codex thread: node "$RUNNER" start --working-dir "$PWD" --effort "$EFFORT" --sandbox danger-full-access . b. Claude Independent Analysis (IMMEDIATELY, before polling): Analyze the question independently using own knowledge and optionally MCP tools. Follow the structured format in references/claude-analysis-template.md . Complete this BEFORE reading any Codex output. See references/workflow.md Step 2.5 for detailed instructions. c. INFORMATION BARRIER: Do NOT read $STATE_DIR/review.md or interpret Codex's conclusions until Step 5. Poll activity telemetry (file reads, URLs, topics) is allowed for progress reporting.

  • Poll Codex with adaptive intervals (Round 1: 90s/60s/30s/15s..., Round 2+: 45s/30s/15s...). After each poll, report specific activities from poll output. See references/workflow.md for parsing guide. NEVER report generic "Codex is running".

  • Cross-Analysis: After Codex completes, compare Claude's independent analysis with Codex output. Identify genuine agreements, genuine disagreements, and unique perspectives from each side. See references/workflow.md Step 4.

  • Resume via --thread-id and loop until consensus, stalemate, or hard cap (5 rounds).

  • Present user-facing synthesis with agreements, disagreements, cited sources, and confidence.

Effort Level Guide

Level Depth Best for

low

Surface check Quick sanity check

medium

Standard review Most day-to-day work

high

Deep analysis Important features

xhigh

Exhaustive Critical/security-sensitive

Required References

  • Execution loop: references/workflow.md

  • Prompt templates: references/prompts.md

  • Output contract: references/output-format.md

  • Claude analysis format: references/claude-analysis-template.md

Rules

  • Keep roles as peers; no reviewer/implementer framing.

  • Codex must NOT modify, create, or delete ANY project files. danger-full-access sandbox is used SOLELY for web search. Prompt contains strict guardrails.

  • Codex MUST cite sources (URL) for factual claims from web.

  • Separate researched facts (with sources) from opinions.

  • Detect stalemate when arguments repeat with no new evidence.

  • End with clear recommendations, source list, and open questions.

  • Information barrier: Claude MUST complete its independent analysis (Step 3b) before reading Codex output. This prevents anchoring bias.

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

Coding

codex-plan-review

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Coding

codex-impl-review

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Coding

codex-commit-review

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Coding

codex-pr-review

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review