codex-review

A code review second opinion surfaces correctness problems, simpler approaches, and best-practice gaps. It groups findings into factual issues and judgment calls across correctness, simplest-approach, and best-practice lenses.

You can review design documents or freeform technical descriptions. The evaluation checks for correctness issues, simpler alternatives, and best-practice gaps, returning actionable findings with specific locations.

A Codex review checks generated artifacts for correctness problems, simpler approaches, and pattern gaps. Each finding is classified as a factual issue or a judgment call to clarify its severity.

Yes, the review output includes specific line numbers or headings to make findings easier to verify and act on. This actionability check ensures you can locate and address each correctness issue or best-practice gap.

Classify code review findings objectively by separating factual issues from judgment calls. The review applies three lenses—factual correctness, simplest-approach, and pattern best-practice—to distinguish verifiable errors from subjective preferences.

No dependencies or components are required to run a Codex review. The skill operates independently to perform read-only execution output capture, spot-check cited claims, and structure findings grouped by evaluation lenses.