Codex PR Review

Purpose

Use this skill to run peer debate on branch changes before merge — covering code quality, PR description, commit hygiene, scope, and merge readiness. Claude and Codex are equal analytical peers — Claude orchestrates the debate loop and final synthesis. No code is modified.

Prerequisites

Current branch differs from base branch (has commits not in base).
git diff <base>...HEAD produces output.
codex CLI is installed and authenticated.
codex-review skill pack is installed (npx github:lploc94/codex_skill).

Runner

RUNNER="{{RUNNER_PATH}}"

Workflow

Ask user to choose review effort level: low, medium, high, or xhigh (default: high). Ask for base branch (discover and validate — see workflow.md §1). Ask for PR title and description (optional). Set EFFORT.
Run pre-flight checks (see references/workflow.md §1.5).
Gather branch diff, commit log, file stats. Build prompts from references/prompts.md, following the Placeholder Injection Guide. Start Codex (background) with node "$RUNNER" start.
Claude Independent Analysis (BEFORE reading Codex output): Claude analyzes the PR independently using format from references/claude-analysis-template.md. INFORMATION BARRIER — do NOT read $STATE_DIR/review.md until analysis is complete. See references/workflow.md Step 2.5.
Poll Codex with adaptive intervals (Round 1: 60s/60s/30s/15s..., Round 2+: 30s/15s...). After each poll, report specific activities from poll output. See references/workflow.md for parsing guide. NEVER report generic "Codex is running" — always extract concrete details.
Cross-Analysis: Compare Claude's FINDING-{N} with Codex's ISSUE-{N}. Identify genuine agreements, genuine disagreements, and unique findings from each side. See references/workflow.md Step 4.
Resume debate via --thread-id until consensus, stalemate, or hard cap (5 rounds).
Final: consensus report + Merge Readiness Scorecard + MERGE / REVISE / REJECT recommendation. NEVER edit code.
Cleanup: node "$RUNNER" stop "$STATE_DIR".

Effort Level Guide

Level	Depth	Best for	Typical time
`low`	Surface check	Quick sanity check	~1-2 min
`medium`	Standard review	Most day-to-day work	~3-5 min
`high`	Deep analysis	Important features	~5-10 min
`xhigh`	Exhaustive	Critical/security-sensitive	~10-15 min

Required References

Detailed execution: references/workflow.md
Prompt templates: references/prompts.md
Output contract: references/output-format.md
Claude analysis format: references/claude-analysis-template.md

Rules

Safety: NEVER run git commit, git add, git rebase, or any command that modifies code or history. This skill is debate-only.
Both Claude and Codex are equal peers — no reviewer/implementer framing.
Information barrier: Claude MUST complete independent analysis (Step 2.5) before reading Codex output. This prevents anchoring bias.
NEVER edit code or create commits — only debate quality and assess merge readiness. The final output is a consensus report + merge readiness scorecard, not a fix.
Codex reviews only; it does not edit files.
If stalemate persists (same unresolved points for 2 consecutive rounds), present both sides, produce Merge Readiness Scorecard from agreed findings, and defer to user.

codex-pr-review