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/threecee-codex
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: productivity, agent-building
Reviews
Write a reviewNo reviews yet. Installed it? Reviews come from verified installers only. How reviews work
Permissions: not checked yet.
What's inside
- Skill name
codex- Description
- Use the local Codex CLI as an independent second agent. Two branches — (1) proactively run `codex review` for a second opinion after completing a substantive change, before presenting it as done or committing; (2) delegate a well-defined implementation task via `codex exec`, ONLY when the user explicitly asks for Codex to do it. Also covers how to prompt Codex.
- License
- MIT
- Instructions
- 148 lines in SKILL.md · view on GitHub
Files (1)
- SKILL.md
SKILL.md (first lines)
# Codex
Codex is an independent agent on PATH (`codex` — invoke as `command codex` if
a shell alias shadows it), sharing this working tree and already authenticated. It is a second opinion, not ground truth: verify what it
reports, own what it changes. It reads the same skills your repo carries.
## If `codex` is not installed
When `codex` is missing from PATH, offer to install it — **ask the user for
approval first**, never install on your own initiative. On yes, follow the
current instructions at https://developers.openai.com/codex/cli. First-run
authentication is interactive — hand that step to the user. Verify with
`codex --version` before proceeding.
## Prompting Codex
Prompt Codex like an operator, not a collaborator: compact, block-structured
with XML tags. State the task, what "done" looks like, and the few constraints
that matter. A tighter prompt beats a bigger run — improve the contract before
raising `--effort`.
- **One task per run.** Split unrelated asks (review, then fix, then docs) into
separate runs; a mixed prompt gets a mixed result.
- **Name skills instead of restating them.** Codex reads the same skills your
repo carries — say "follow write-docs for the doc", "obey refactor-clean: no
compatibility wrappers." Don't re-explain what a skill already carries.
- **Blocks, added only where the task needs them:**
- `<task>` — the concrete job, the repo/failure context, the expected end
state. Nearly always present.
- `<output_contract>` — exact shape, highest-value first, compact.
- `<default_follow_through>` — take the low-risk interpretation and keep
going; stop only when a missing detail changes correctness, safety, or an
irreversible action.
- `<verification_loop>` — before finalizing, check the result against the
requirements and the changed files; revise rather than ship the first
draft. Any risky fix.
- `<grounding>` — ground every claim in code or tool output; label inferences
as inferences. Review and research.
- `<action_safety>` — keep the diff tightly scoped; no drive-by refactors.
Write tasks.
- **Anti-patterns:** vague framing ("take a look"), no output contract ("report
back"), "think harder" in place of a contract, mixing jobs in one run, and
demanding certainty the evidence can't support.
## Review — proactive
Run a Codex review whenever you have a substantive diff you'd want a second set
of eyes on — a refactor, a tricky algorithm, renderer work, a security-sensitive
change — before declaring it done or committing. Skip it for trivial edits
(typos, comments, doc-only).
1. Pick the diff scope: `codex review --uncommitted` for working-tree changes,
`--base <branch>` for a branch diff, `--commit <sha>` for a landed commit.
Scope flags and custom instructions are mutually exclusive (despite what
`--help` implies): `codex review "<instructions>"` reviews the default
scope with your framing, a scope flag takes no prompt. When you do write
instructions, scope the risk area — never state the answer you expect
(unprimed, same discipline as
[screenshot-critique](../../visual/screenshot-critique/SKILL.md)).
2. Triage every finding: confirm it against the code before acting. Preserve
Codex's evidence boundaries — an inference it labelled is not a fact.
Overlap with your own doubts is high-priority evidence; a finding you
dismiss needs a stated reason, not silence.
3. Report the outcome to the user — what Codex flagged, what you fixed, what
you dismissed and why. Done when every finding is either fixed or
explicitly dismissed.
## Implementation — explicit ask only
Delegate implementation to Codex only when the user names Codex for the task.
Never hand it work on your own initiative, and never re-delegate follow-up
work without a fresh ask.
1. Slice the task sharp before delegating — goal, constraints, and how to
verify — using the prompt discipline above. An underspecified task stays
with you until a fresh agent couldn't misread it.
2. Start from a clean tree (or record the baseline commit) so Codex's diff is
separable from yours.
3. Pick the sandbox by what the task must RUN:
- Pure code + typecheck/unit: `codex exec --sandbox workspace-write "<task>"`.
Network is off; add `-c sandbox_workspace_write.network_access=true` only
when the task must fetch (e.g. new deps).
- **Browser verification, dev servers, or full test runs: use
`codex exec --dangerously-bypass-approvals-and-sandbox "<task>"`.** The
sandbox blocks localhost binds (`listen EPERM` on vite/playwright), so a
sandboxed codex ships code it never saw run. Bypass trades that blindness
for zero OS control: only in a dedicated git worktree, only with a prompt
you authored end-to-end (never relaying third-party text), and the diff
review you owe afterwards is the control.
Use `-o <file>` to capture the final message and background long calls;
suppress codex's stderr thinking-noise with `2>/dev/null` so it doesn't
bloat your context (drop it only to debug a failing run), and add
`--skip-git-repo-check` to run outside a git repo. Non-interactive runs
never ask for approval either way.
4. Follow up with `codex exec resume <session-id> "<follow-up>"`, taking the
id from the run header. `resume --last` means the most recent session
globally — a review or any other codex run in between will hijack it. If
two resume rounds don't converge, stop delegating and finish it yourself —
iterating a confused agent costs more than taking over.
5. You own the result: read the full diff, run the tests, and only then report
it. "Codex says it's done" is not done.
## Exec liveness — a hang looks like work
A backgrounded `codex exec` can wedge at startup: process alive at ~0% CPU, but
no session file under `~/.codex/sessions/<Y/M/D>/`, no network socket, no tree
changes. "Process running" is NOT "working."
- **Stdin is always a file or `/dev/null`, never an inherited terminal.** Left
on an interactive/piped stdin with no prompt source, exec prints `Reading
additional input from stdin...` and blocks forever — the most common hang.
Either pass the prompt as a positional arg with `< /dev/null`, or feed a
prompt file with `codex exec [flags] - < prompt.txt` (the `-` makes codex
read the task from stdin, and a missing file fails the redirect loudly —
unlike `"$(cat prompt.txt)"`, which silently sends the fallback string as
the task). Add `nohup`/`&` as needed.
- **Watchdog:** put a unique marker in the prompt, then kill the exec if
`grep -rl "<marker>" ~/.codex/sessions/<Y/M/D>/` finds no session within
~3 minutes. Relaunching after a kill reliably works.From threecee/software-factory-kit, MIT.
More from threecee/software-factory-kit
- 0.563score
compare-screenshots
threecee
Compare screenshots to judge which image is less wrong, not to match a baseline.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.563score
refactor-clean
threecee
Refactor toward one clear owner per concept instead of adding sediment.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.563score
code-review
threecee
Review a current diff for correctness, stale references, ownership, test quality, unnecessary compatibility, and cleanup.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.559score
independent-lane-review
threecee
Run a fresh-context, multi-model adversarial review of a lane before train assembly or on demand.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.559score
finishing-a-development-branch
threecee
Use after implementation and tests are complete to choose and safely execute merge, pull-request, keep, or discard handling while respecting normal, linked…
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.559score
brainstorming
threecee
Explore intent and produce an approved design before unbriefed creative implementation.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.559score
implement-spec
threecee
Implement an approved spec through reviewable passes.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.559score
audit-choices
threecee
Audit decisions an implementing agent made beyond the brief, without changing code.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.557score
claude
threecee
Use Claude Code as an independent `claude -p` subagent when the user explicitly asks for Claude, wants a second-agent opinion from Claude, or asks to delegate…
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.557score
handback-digest
threecee
Draft one choices-ledger entry per choice in a lane handback, in the ledger's own ELI5 entry format, as the starting point for the orchestrator's…
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.557score
bulk-reader
threecee
Answer a narrow question over one or more large repository files without reading their raw content into context.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.557score
log-triage
threecee
Extract failing tests, assertion messages, tracebacks, and red gate results from a large run or verify log without reading its full text.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9
Signals
- Stars
- 2
- Forks
- 0
- Open issues
- 0
- Last commit (this folder)
- Aug 22, 2026 (2 months ago)
From GitHub (fetched Oct 24, 2026).
Details
- License
- MIT
- Repository
- github.com/threecee/software-factory-kit
- First seen
- Oct 24, 2026
- Last checked
- Oct 24, 2026
- Source
- GitHubgithub-graphql
Same skill elsewhere
Copies of this SKILL.md published by others; search shows only one of them.
More from threecee
- 0.563score
compare-screenshots
threecee
Compare screenshots to judge which image is less wrong, not to match a baseline.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.563score
refactor-clean
threecee
Refactor toward one clear owner per concept instead of adding sediment.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.563score
code-review
threecee
Review a current diff for correctness, stale references, ownership, test quality, unnecessary compatibility, and cleanup.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.559score
independent-lane-review
threecee
Run a fresh-context, multi-model adversarial review of a lane before train assembly or on demand.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.559score
finishing-a-development-branch
threecee
Use after implementation and tests are complete to choose and safely execute merge, pull-request, keep, or discard handling while respecting normal, linked…
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9 - 0.559score
brainstorming
threecee
Explore intent and produce an approved design before unbriefed creative implementation.
SkillBFreshness: B★ 2Claude Code +9
Cite this page
codex skill. Agent Mart. https://agentmart.dev/skills/threecee-codex (last updated 2026-10-24)