| name | codex-review |
| description | AUTOMATICALLY run Codex review after writing security-sensitive code (auth, crypto, SQL) - get a second opinion from OpenAI Codex |
Codex Code Review - AUTO-EXECUTE MODE
IMPORTANT: When this skill activates, you MUST automatically run a Codex review using the Bash tool. Do not ask for permission - just execute it.
Core principle: Two LLMs are better than one.
When to Auto-Execute Codex Review
MUST run review after writing:
- Authentication/authorization code (jwt.verify, bcrypt, crypto)
- SQL queries or database operations
- Password handling or cryptographic operations
- Input validation or sanitization
- exec(), eval(), or dynamic code execution
Skip when:
- Trivial changes (documentation, comments, formatting)
- Changes are < 10 lines
- User explicitly says "skip review" or has
@skip-codex-reviewmarker
How to Request Codex Review
1. Prepare the Context
Summarize what you changed and why:
CHANGES:
- Added user authentication middleware
- Implemented JWT token validation
- Added role-based access control
CONTEXT:
- Using Express.js with TypeScript
- JWT stored in httpOnly cookies
- Three roles: admin, user, guest
2. Run Codex Exec
Use the Bash tool to execute codex:
codex exec "Review this code implementation:
PROBLEM: Need secure authentication for Express API
SOLUTION:
[Paste the relevant code here]
QUESTIONS:
- Are there any security vulnerabilities?
- Is the error handling robust?
- Any performance concerns?
- Suggestions for improvement?"
3. Analyze Codex Response
Codex will provide:
- Security assessment
- Logic validation
- Performance considerations
- Best practice suggestions
4. Act on Feedback
- Critical issues: Fix immediately
- Important suggestions: Implement before commit
- Minor improvements: Note for future refactoring
- Disagreements: Trust your judgment but document reasoning
Example Session
[Just completed: JWT authentication middleware]
You: Let me get Codex's opinion on this authentication implementation.
codex exec "Review this authentication code:
CONTEXT: Express.js API with JWT cookie-based auth
CODE:
export const authenticateJWT = async (req, res, next) => {
const token = req.cookies.jwt;
if (!token) return res.status(401).json({ error: 'Unauthorized' });
try {
const decoded = jwt.verify(token, process.env.JWT_SECRET);
req.user = await User.findById(decoded.userId);
next();
} catch (err) {
return res.status(401).json({ error: 'Invalid token' });
}
};
QUESTIONS:
- Security vulnerabilities?
- Error handling sufficient?
- Performance implications?
"
[Codex responds]:
SECURITY:
- ✅ Good: httpOnly cookies, JWT verification
- ⚠️ Issue: No JWT_SECRET validation on startup
- ⚠️ Issue: User query could fail, should handle null
PERFORMANCE:
- ⚠️ DB query on every request - consider caching decoded token
SUGGESTIONS:
- Add JWT_SECRET existence check at startup
- Handle null user case
- Consider Redis for token caching
- Add rate limiting
You: [Fix critical issues: JWT_SECRET check, null user handling]
You: [Note for later: token caching, rate limiting]
Integration with Existing Workflows
With code-reviewer subagent:
- Use code-reviewer for architectural review
- Use codex-review for security/implementation details
- Complementary perspectives
With TDD:
- Write tests first
- Implement code
- Run codex-review before commit
- Fix issues, ensure tests still pass
With git workflow:
- Make changes
- Run codex-review
- Fix issues
- Commit with confidence
Skip Conditions
Automatic skip:
- File contains
@skip-codex-reviewcomment - Environment variable:
SKIP_CODEX_REVIEW=1 - Session tracking: Won't nag repeatedly
Manual skip:
- Simply proceed without running codex
- Skill is suggestive, not blocking
Tips for Effective Codex Reviews
1. Be specific in prompts:
# Good
codex exec "Review for SQL injection vulnerabilities in this query builder"
# Less effective
codex exec "Review this code"
2. Provide context:
- What problem are you solving?
- What constraints exist?
- What specific concerns do you have?
3. Focus reviews:
- Security review
- Performance review
- Logic review
- Best practices review
4. Batch related changes:
- Review 3-5 related files together
- Show how they interact
- Get holistic feedback
Common Patterns
Security Review
codex exec "Security review for authentication code:
[code]
Focus on: injection attacks, token handling, timing attacks"
Performance Review
codex exec "Performance review for data processing:
[code]
Focus on: algorithmic complexity, database queries, memory usage"
Logic Review
codex exec "Logic review for workflow engine:
[code]
Focus on: edge cases, state transitions, error paths"
Red Flags (When to ALWAYS use Codex)
- Authentication/authorization code
- Data validation logic
- SQL query construction
- File system operations
- Cryptographic operations
- Regular expressions
- Parsing user input
- Rate limiting/throttling
Benefits
✅ Catch blind spots: Different LLM, different perspective ✅ No blocking: Suggestion only, no workflow disruption ✅ Fast: 2-10 seconds for review ✅ Cost-effective: Single API call for entire changeset ✅ Learning: See alternative approaches and patterns
Remember: Codex review is advisory. Use your engineering judgment for final decisions.