From codex-review
Guides codex-review plugin workflows: command selection for plan/implementation reviews, findings decisions (ACCEPT/REJECT/FIX), status checks, plan resolution, transitions, and guardrails.
npx claudepluginhub boyand/codex-review --plugin codex-reviewThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
This skill provides cross-cutting knowledge for the codex-review plugin. Individual commands (`/codex-review:plan`, `/codex-review:impl`, etc.) have their own detailed instructions — this skill covers what falls between them.
Reviews implementation plan files (JSON/MD) with Codex, returning structured feedback, verdict (APPROVED/NEEDS_CHANGES), and session token for debate rounds.
Invokes Codex to review implementation plans for gaps, risks, suboptimal steps, and alternatives. Triggered after Claude plans or on requests for second opinions.
Orchestrates cross-agent code review: Claude implements plans/code, Codex CLI reviews via bash scripts. Activates on 'codex review' or Russian triggers.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
This skill provides cross-cutting knowledge for the codex-review plugin. Individual commands (/codex-review:plan, /codex-review:impl, etc.) have their own detailed instructions — this skill covers what falls between them.
| User intent | Command |
|---|---|
| Review the current plan | /codex-review:plan |
| Review the implementation against the approved plan | /codex-review:impl |
| See severity counts and per-finding decisions | /codex-review:summary |
| Check workflow phase, round, step, file paths | /codex-review:status |
| Diagnose session resolution or missing tools | /codex-review:doctor |
The plan command resolves the plan file from the current Claude session automatically.
If the workflow already has a canonical artifacts/plan.md, that plan is used on all subsequent rounds. Only --plan <path> replaces it.
Inline plans: if the plan exists only as chat text and not as a file, do not guess from another file. Save the plan to a file first:
I'll save the plan to a file so it can be reviewed.
Then rerun with --plan <path>.
Plan review: ACCEPT, REJECT, DEFER
Implementation review: FIX, REJECT, WONTFIX
Every finding ID must be addressed. High-severity rejects need concrete justification — not "this is fine" but why it's actually safe to skip.
After a review round, ask the user what to do next inline. Then run the transition yourself:
__approve — advance to next phase or complete__repeat — run another review round__done — finish earlyDo not tell the user to type these. Do not re-offer the choices on unrelated later turns.
--session-pid or --session-id manually; the wrapper injects them.workflow.json or decisions.tsv.