codex-review
Run a second-pass Codex review over changed files, produce severity-ordered findings, and escalate repeated fix-loop invariants to a Sol-max repair architect.
Skill by tcbuilds
Chalk Labs
Need help deploying codex-review?
Chalk Labs sets up agents like this inside real teams: connected to your tools, tested on your data, with a human in the loop where it matters.
Install
Works with Claude Code, Claude apps, Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot, VS Code, OpenCode, Goose, Windsurf. Read the repository before you give any tool access to your data.
npx agentmarket install skill/tcbuilds-codex-review
Asks which of your tools to add it to (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, VS Code, Windsurf, Gemini CLI, Claude Desktop) and shows the change first. See https://agentmart.dev/cli.
Get the weekly diff
The weekly diff: one email a week with new agent tools, notable updates and grade changes, plus security alerts for tools you follow. Double opt-in, one-click unsubscribe.
About
Use cases: agent-building
Reviews
Write a reviewNo reviews yet. Installed it? Reviews come from verified installers only. How reviews work
Permissions
What this skill can do and what it asks for, from its SKILL.md and code. Checked Nov 1, 2026.
- Tools
- No tools found
- Secrets
- None asked for
- Install scripts
- None found
Network hosts it talks to 1
codeload.github.com· found in install command
Files it touches
~/.claude/skills/codex-review
What's inside
- Skill name
codex-review- Description
- Run a second-pass Codex review over changed files, produce severity-ordered findings, and escalate repeated fix-loop invariants to a Sol-max repair architect. Use after implementation, before marking tasks complete, before merge requests/pull requests, when a skeptical review is needed, or when fixes become whack-a-mole.
- License
- MIT
- Instructions
- 167 lines in SKILL.md · view on GitHub
Files (9)
- SKILL.md
- astra_high_reviewer.config.toml · assets/
- findings-ledger.schema.json · assets/
- fix-architecture-result.schema.json · assets/
- review-clarification-result.schema.json · assets/
- review-result.schema.json · assets/
- review-verification-result.schema.json · assets/
- sol_high_reviewer.config.toml · assets/
- sol_max_fix_architect.config.toml · assets/
SKILL.md (first lines)
# Codex Review
Independent gate for correctness, security/data handling, performance/resources, and tests. Review only task-relevant changed files; preserve unrelated changes.
## Profiles and launch
Inspect before installing under `${CODEX_HOME:-$HOME/.codex}/`:
- `assets/astra_high_reviewer.config.toml` -> `astra_high_reviewer.config.toml`
- `assets/sol_max_fix_architect.config.toml` -> `sol_max_fix_architect.config.toml`
Preflight the installed file, not `codex ... --help` (help does not load the profile): require the exact `${CODEX_HOME:-$HOME/.codex}/<name>.config.toml`, parse it with a local TOML parser, and assert expected model, effort, network, and delegation pins. Launch with `--strict-config` for Codex's recognized-key check. Reviewer pins `gpt-6-astra` high; architect pins Sol max. No priority flag, Terra, or model fallback. Retry capacity errors with bounded backoff, else block gate.
### Variables
| Variable | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `<skill-dir>` | Absolute path of this skill directory, the parent of `assets/`. |
| `<files>` | Scoped file list from the review contract step 1. Never the whole repo. |
| `$OUT` | Writable path for the complete-review JSON, e.g. `"$(mktemp -d)/codex-review.json"`. Reused for verification output. |
| `$CLARIFY_OUT` | Writable path for the one clarification JSON. |
| `$ARCH_OUT` | Writable path for the repair-architect JSON. |
| `<packet-path>` | Path of the compact repair evidence packet written before the architect launch. |
| `$SESSION_ID` | Session id of the round-1 reviewer run. `codex exec` writes session files under `${CODEX_HOME:-$HOME/.codex}/sessions/`, but read the id only from this run's own authoritative output metadata. If it is absent or cannot be bound to this run, do not resume and do not guess from directory listings: use the fresh scoped-verification fallback instead. |
Create output paths under a temp dir the orchestrator owns, and delete them at closure unless the user asks to keep them.
```bash
rtk proxy timeout 1800 codex exec -p astra_high_reviewer --strict-config \
--add-dir "$HOME/.local/share/rtk" --skip-git-repo-check \
--output-schema "<skill-dir>/assets/review-result.schema.json" -o "$OUT" \
"Review these files. Review only: do not edit files. Compare target baseline to HEAD before classifying each finding. Use RTK for shell commands. Files: <files>. Cover correctness, security and data handling, performance and resource use, and tests and verification. Order findings by severity. Label each finding EMPIRICALLY_VERIFIED, PROBED, or HYPOTHETICAL and classify scope_status as REGRESSION, NEWLY_REACHABLE, PRE_EXISTING, or HYPOTHETICAL. For every finding identify why the changed diff owns it, the violated invariant, failing execution path, repair direction, and named proof test. Suggest the repair direction but do not write an executor brief. Return JSON matching the supplied schema. Keep prose terse; preserve code, commands, identifiers, probe output, and exact error strings verbatim." \
< /dev/null
```
Run in background. Network is enabled for all hosts. Keep `rtk proxy`, `timeout 1800`, RTK writable dir, strict profile/schema, and `< /dev/null`. Without RTK, remove wrapper and report fallback. Missing/empty `$OUT`, nonzero exit, or timeout means gate did not run; never infer no findings. Inspect session JSONL (`turn_aborted`, restart evidence) before retry/resume/re-scope.
## Review contract
1. Derive scoped tracked/untracked files from user input and Git state.
2. Resolve the first standards root containing `standards.md`: repo
`.claude/rules/`, else `~/.claude/rules/`, else this playbook's
`templates/claude-rules/`. Read `standards.md`, then parse `paths:`
frontmatter below that root and read every rule matching a scoped source,
test, fixture, config, migration, or generated path. Select by path match,
never by a guessed language filename. If no LGTM root exists, use only a
legacy standards document explicitly named by repository instructions. Cite
explicit violations by standard name/ID, minimum Medium. If none resolves,
skip standards citation and record that no standards file was found.
3. With `.codegraph/`, use `codegraph explore` for structural questions and inspect callers of every changed public symbol. Report affected untouched callers/call paths and list checked symbols. Without index, record read-only blast-radius method.
4. Require findings in severity order. Each has evidence class, stable fingerprint, scope status, violated invariant, failing path, repair direction, named proof test, and evidence. Reviewer direction is not executor brief.
5. Compare every candidate finding against the target baseline before scoring it. Use `REGRESSION` when the diff introduces a defect, `NEWLY_REACHABLE` when the diff materially expands reachability or impact, `PRE_EXISTING` when the same behavior and impact already exist on the target, and `HYPOTHETICAL` when the path is not demonstrated. State the baseline evidence briefly.
6. Keep pre-existing findings visible, but do not turn them into merge blockers unless the diff worsens them, the ticket explicitly owns them, or project policy requires all findings to close. Put them in residual risk as backlog or accepted with a concrete rationale. Never use `PRE_EXISTING` to excuse a changed capability, authorization boundary, data flow, or reachability.
7. Limit review expansion to the changed execution path and its direct callers. A repository-wide architecture or security audit is out of scope unless the diff changes that boundary. Group test-coverage gaps under their root defect instead of creating independent whack-a-mole findings.
8. Audit every new or changed test for vacuity. A test that cannot fail proves nothing and survives every later round, because each gate watches it pass. Check for a task cancelled before its first await, an event set but never awaited, an assertion on state the test itself assigned, and a `getattr(mod, "NAME", default)` whose default masks a rename. State explicitly which tests could pass while the behavior they name is broken. Group these under the root defect.
9. Maintain `assets/findings-ledger.schema.json`; orchestrator owns ledger.
Threat calibration for vetted internal/regulated systems:
- Weight up correctness, accidental tenant/data spillage, least privilege, secret hygiene, normal-operation exhaustion/availability, and control gaps.
- Weight hostile-repo/user chains Low unless accidentally reachable; then score accidental impact. Higher data sensitivity raises spillage/control impact, not hostile-user plausibility.
- Probe a hypothetical only to determine whether the changed diff makes it reachable. Stop after one bounded probe when it remains hypothetical.
## Output format
Parse the JSON first, then render:
```markdown
# Codex Review
Baseline: <ref> | Files reviewed: <n> | Standards file: <path or "none found">
## Findings
### Critical
- [fingerprint] [file:line] Finding. Evidence: EMPIRICALLY_VERIFIED | PROBED | HYPOTHETICAL. Scope: REGRESSION | NEWLY_REACHABLE | PRE_EXISTING | HYPOTHETICAL.
Invariant: <violated invariant>. Path: <failing path>. Direction: <repair direction>. Proof test: <name>.
### High
- None
### Medium
- [fingerprint] [file:line] ... (same shape)
### Low
- [fingerprint] [file:line] ... (same shape)
## Blast radius
- Symbols checked: <list>. Affected untouched callers: <list or none>. Method: <codegraph explore | read-only method used>.
## Vacuous tests
- <test name> could pass while <named behavior> is broken. Grouped under <root fingerprint>.
## Residual risk
- [backlogged|accepted|monitor] <item> — <concrete rationale> <link if backlogged>
## Verification
- Commands run and results. Note any fallback used (no RTK, fresh scoped verification instead of resume, no standards file found).
## Gate Decision
PASS / BLOCKED
```
## Fix loop
Fresh round 1 reviews complete diff. Fixes use original Luna thread. Verify fixes by resuming original Astra reviewer with only ledger, prior findings, and changed hunks:
```bash
# Use only the session ID captured from this round-1 launch's authoritative
# output metadata. If it is absent or cannot be bound to this run, do not resume;
# use the fresh scoped-verification fallback below.
rtk proxy timeout 1800 codex exec resume "$SESSION_ID" -c sandbox_workspace_write.network_access=true -o "$OUT" \
-m gpt-6-astra -c model_reasoning_effort=high \
--output-schema "<skill-dir>/assets/review-verification-result.schema.json" \
"Verify these fixes against your prior findings and the supplied ledger. Changed since your last review: <fix diff/hunks>. Re-check only your findings and the new hunks. Return JSON matching the supplied schema." \
< /dev/null
```
Run affected checks during fixes; the Astra reviewer may probe but not rerun full suite. Require new evidence to reopen resolved fingerprints and new probe to contradict empirical findings. If resume fails, use one fresh scoped verification.
When stable: orchestrator runs full relevant suite once, then a fresh Astra reviewer reviews complete final diff with no ledger, old findings/verdicts, architect output, or clarification. Compare ledger only afterward. Any final-review code change stales suite evidence: focused checks -> full suite -> another fresh confirmation.From tcbuilds/nautilus, MIT.
More from tcbuilds/nautilus
- 0.570score
prompt-injection-audit
tcbuilds
Run a read-only, evidence-based audit of an LLM or agent application for prompt injection and the failures that make injection matter.
SkillAFreshness: AClaude Code +9 - 0.566score
codex-implement
tcbuilds
Execute one implementation slice or an implementation_plan.md task, phase, or full plan through parallel file-owned Codex CLI workers in isolated Git worktrees.
SkillAFreshness: AClaude Code +9 - 0.529score
pi-implement
tcbuilds
Execute one implementation slice or an implementation_plan.md task, phase, or full plan through Pi-native subagent workflows.
SkillBFreshness: BClaude Code +9 - 0.524score
warmup
tcbuilds
Warm up a fresh Claude/Codex session by loading repo-local context.
SkillBFreshness: BClaude Code +9 - 0.524score
repo-orientation
tcbuilds
Build an onboarding-quality breakdown of an existing repository.
SkillBFreshness: BClaude Code +9 - 0.524score
roadmap
tcbuilds
Create or update implementation_plan.md with the smallest evidence-backed set of Markdown task checkboxes that fully satisfies the request.
SkillBFreshness: BClaude Code +9 - 0.524score
pi-review
tcbuilds
Run an independent Pi-native review over changed files using fresh-context reviewer subagents, evidence-backed severity findings, parent synthesis…
SkillBFreshness: BClaude Code +9 - 0.520score
claude-build
tcbuilds
Claude Code-only implementation workflow for implementation_plan.md using Claude specialist agents, phase-boundary commits, and the codex-review gate.
SkillBFreshness: BClaude Code +9 - 0.494score
bro
tcbuilds
Restate the last message in plain human language, with no jargon.
SkillBFreshness: BClaude Code +9 - 0.479score
nautilus-sync
tcbuilds
Sync a personal skill or agent from ~/.claude/ into a public-facing nautilus-shaped playbook repo as a sanitized loadable artifact.
SkillCFreshness: CClaude Code +9 - 0.474score
refine-spec
tcbuilds
Read a draft spec file (idea.md, mvp.md, prd.md, brief.md, plan.md, spec.md, etc.) and interactively quiz the user across multiple rounds with AskUserQuestion…
SkillCFreshness: CClaude Code +9 - 0.474score
handoff
tcbuilds
Capture the state of an in-flight session into HANDOFF.md so a future session, teammate, or agent can resume without re-deriving context.
SkillCFreshness: CClaude Code +9
Signals
- Stars
- 0
- Forks
- 0
- Open issues
- 0
- Last commit (this folder)
- Oct 9, 2026 (25 days ago)
From GitHub (fetched Oct 24, 2026).
Details
- License
- MIT
- Repository
- github.com/tcbuilds/nautilus
- First seen
- Oct 24, 2026
- Last checked
- Oct 24, 2026
- Source
- GitHubgithub-graphql
More from tcbuilds
- 0.570score
prompt-injection-audit
tcbuilds
Run a read-only, evidence-based audit of an LLM or agent application for prompt injection and the failures that make injection matter.
SkillAFreshness: AClaude Code +9 - 0.566score
codex-implement
tcbuilds
Execute one implementation slice or an implementation_plan.md task, phase, or full plan through parallel file-owned Codex CLI workers in isolated Git worktrees.
SkillAFreshness: AClaude Code +9 - 0.529score
pi-implement
tcbuilds
Execute one implementation slice or an implementation_plan.md task, phase, or full plan through Pi-native subagent workflows.
SkillBFreshness: BClaude Code +9 - 0.524score
pi-review
tcbuilds
Run an independent Pi-native review over changed files using fresh-context reviewer subagents, evidence-backed severity findings, parent synthesis…
SkillBFreshness: BClaude Code +9 - 0.524score
repo-orientation
tcbuilds
Build an onboarding-quality breakdown of an existing repository.
SkillBFreshness: BClaude Code +9 - 0.524score
roadmap
tcbuilds
Create or update implementation_plan.md with the smallest evidence-backed set of Markdown task checkboxes that fully satisfies the request.
SkillBFreshness: BClaude Code +9
Done for you
Rather not set it up yourself?
Chalk Labs scopes, builds and runs agents for your team: the task audit, the eval harness, the integrations and the weekly ops report. Fixed scope, priced before we start.
See how we build AI agents →Read the case studies
Chalk Labs is a two-founder AI and growth studio. We build AI agents, CRMs and MVPs for Web3 and AI companies, and have shipped 50+ product and token launches.
- launches shipped
- 50+
- launches shipped
- media placements
- 500+
- media placements
- founders on every account
- 2
- founders on every account
Press we've placed: Forbes · CoinDesk · Decrypt · Cointelegraph · The Block
Rahil Jain, Co-founder, Chalk Labs. Ex-Goldman Sachs engineer. You talk to the person who builds it.
Get codex-review running in your business
Tell us what you want to automate. A founder replies within one working day with a plan, not a pitch deck.
Cite this page
codex-review skill. Agent Mart. https://agentmart.dev/skills/tcbuilds-codex-review (last updated 2026-10-24)