agentleFS
robertkarlrobertkarl/rkstack/codex/SKILL.md

gstack-codex

Skill0 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

OpenAI Codex CLI wrapper — three modes. Code review: independent diff review via codex review with pass/fail gate. Challenge: adversarial mode that tries to break your code. Consult: ask codex anything with session continuity for follow-ups. The "200 IQ autistic developer" second opinion. Use when asked to "codex review", "codex challenge", "ask codex", "second opinion", or "consult codex". (gstack)

  • Installs packages

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

78 rules. About 0 are common, 43 are distinctive, and 35 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈43

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 35

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    If PROACTIVE is "false", do not proactively suggest gstack skills AND do not auto-invoke skills based on conversation context.

    line 60
  2. Very specific:

    If SKILL_PREFIX is "true", the user has namespaced skill names.

    line 66
  3. Very specific:

    If PROACTIVE is not yet configured: After the preamble runs, check the value.

    line 71
  4. Distinctive:

    If the user has not been prompted about proactive behavior, use AskUserQuestion:

    line 72
  5. Very specific:

    If A: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set proactive true If B: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set proactive …

    line 82
  6. Very specific:

    If B: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set proactive false

    line 83
  7. Very specific:

    If HAS_ROUTING is no AND ROUTING_DECLINED is false: Check if a CLAUDE.md file exists in the project root.

    line 85
  8. Distinctive:

    Check if a CLAUDE.md file exists in the project root.

    line 86
  9. Distinctive:

    If A: Append this section to the end of CLAUDE.md:

    line 98
  10. Distinctive:

    Start from lived experience.

    line 132
  11. Distinctive:

    No em dashes. Use commas, periods, or "..." instead.

    line 143
  12. Distinctive:

    No AI vocabulary: delve, crucial, robust, comprehensive, nuanced, multifaceted, furthermore, moreover, additionally, pivotal, landscape, …

    line 144
  13. Distinctive:

    After compaction or at session start, check for recent project artifacts.

    line 152
  14. Distinctive:

    If artifacts are listed, read the most recent one to recover context.

    line 173
  15. Very specific:

    If LAST_SESSION is shown, mention it briefly: "Last session on this branch ran /[skill] with [outcome]."

    line 175
  16. Distinctive:

    Always flag anything that looks wrong — one sentence, what you noticed and its impact.

    line 202
  17. Very specific:

    Before building anything unfamiliar, search first.

    line 206
  18. Distinctive:

    When completing a skill workflow, report status using one of:

    line 211
  19. Distinctive:

    If you have attempted a task 3 times without success, STOP and escalate.

    line 222
  20. Distinctive:

    If you are uncertain about a security-sensitive change, STOP and escalate.

    line 223
  21. Distinctive:

    If the scope of work exceeds what you can verify, STOP and escalate.

    line 224
  22. Distinctive:

    Before completing, reflect on this session:

    line 236
  23. Distinctive:

    If yes, log an operational learning for future sessions:

    line 242
  24. Distinctive:

    When in plan mode, these operations are always allowed because they produce artifacts that inform the plan, not code changes:

    line 252
  25. Distinctive:

    When you are in plan mode and about to call ExitPlanMode:

    line 267
  26. Very specific:

    Check if the plan file already has a ## GSTACK REVIEW REPORT section.

    line 269
  27. Distinctive:

    If it DOES — skip (a review skill already wrote a richer report).

    line 270
  28. Distinctive:

    If it does NOT — run this command:

    line 271
  29. Very specific:

    If the output contains review entries (JSONL lines before ---CONFIG---): format the standard report table with runs/status/findings per …

    line 279
  30. Very specific:

    If the output is NO_REVIEWS or empty: write this placeholder table:

    line 282
  31. Very specific:

    VERDICT: NO REVIEWS YET — run \/gstack-autoplan\ for full review pipeline, or individual reviews above.

    line 294
  32. Distinctive:

    If the URL contains "github.com" → platform is GitHub

    line 305
  33. Distinctive:

    If the URL contains "gitlab" → platform is GitLab

    line 306
  34. Very specific:

    If that fails: git rev-parse --verify origin/main 2>/dev/null → use main

    line 325
  35. Distinctive:

    If all fail, fall back to main.

    line 328
  36. Very specific:

    If NOT_FOUND: stop and tell the user: "Codex CLI not found.

    line 353
  37. Very specific:

    Check for a diff (with fallback if origin isn't available): git diff origin/<base> --stat 2>/dev/null | tail -1 || git diff <base> --stat …

    line 365
  38. Distinctive:

    If a diff exists, use AskUserQuestion:

    line 367
  39. Very specific:

    If no diff, check for plan files scoped to the current project: ls -t ~/.claude/plans/*.md 2>/dev/null | xargs grep -l "$(basename $(pwd))" …

    line 374
  40. Very specific:

    If no project-scoped match, fall back to: ls -t ~/.claude/plans/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1 but warn the user: "Note: this plan may be from …

    line 376
  41. Distinctive:

    If a plan file exists, offer to review it

    line 378
  42. Very specific:

    Reasoning effort override: If the user's input contains --xhigh anywhere, note it and remove it from the prompt text before passing to …

    line 382
  43. Distinctive:

    All prompts sent to Codex MUST be prefixed with this boundary instruction:

    line 394
  44. Distinctive:

    Run Codex code review against the current branch diff.

    line 405
  45. Distinctive:

    Create temp files for output capture:

    line 407
  46. Distinctive:

    Run the review (5-minute timeout).

    line 412
  47. Very specific:

    If the user passed --xhigh, use "xhigh" instead of "high".

    line 421
  48. Very specific:

    Use timeout: 300000 on the Bash call.

    line 423
  49. Very specific:

    If the output contains [P1] — the gate is FAIL.

    line 439
  50. Very specific:

    If no [P1] markers are found (only [P2] or no findings) — the gate is PASS.

    line 440
  51. Very specific:

    Cross-model comparison: If /review (Claude's own review) was already run earlier in this conversation, compare the two sets of findings:

    line 458
  52. Distinctive:

    After displaying the Review Readiness Dashboard in conversation output, also update the

    line 485
  53. Distinctive:

    Check if there is an active plan file in this conversation (the host provides plan file paths in system messages — look for plan file …

    line 490
  54. Distinctive:

    If not found, skip this section silently — not every review runs in plan mode.

    line 492
  55. Distinctive:

    Read the review log output you already have from the Review Readiness Dashboard step above.

    line 496
  56. Distinctive:

    All fields needed for the Findings column are now present in the JSONL entries.

    line 509
  57. Distinctive:

    If Eng Review is not CLEAR and not skipped globally, append "eng review required".

    line 532
  58. Very specific:

    Search the plan file for a \## GSTACK REVIEW REPORT\ section anywhere in the file (not just at the end — content may have been added after …

    line 540
  59. Very specific:

    If found, replace it entirely using the Edit tool.

    line 542
  60. Distinctive:

    If no such section exists, append it to the end of the plan file.

    line 546
  61. Distinctive:

    Always place it as the very last section in the plan file.

    line 547
  62. Very specific:

    Default prompt (no focus): "IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, or agents/.

    line 561
  63. Distinctive:

    Run codex exec with JSONL output to capture reasoning traces and tool calls (5-minute timeout):

    line 571
  64. Distinctive:

    Ask Codex anything about the codebase.

    line 622
  65. Very specific:

    If a session file exists (not NO_SESSION), use AskUserQuestion:

    line 629
  66. Very specific:

    Plan review auto-detection: If the user's prompt is about reviewing a plan, or if plan files exist and the user said /codex with no …

    line 642
  67. Distinctive:

    Run codex exec with JSONL output to capture reasoning traces (5-minute timeout):

    line 682
  68. Distinctive:

    After presenting, note any points where Codex's analysis differs from your own understanding.

    line 747
  69. Very specific:

    Model: No model is hardcoded — codex uses whatever its current default is (the frontier agentic coding model).

    line 755
  70. Very specific:

    Web search: All codex commands use --enable web_search_cached so Codex can look up docs and APIs during review.

    line 768
  71. Very specific:

    If the user specifies a model (e.g., /codex review -m gpt-5.1-codex-max or /codex challenge -m gpt-5.2), pass the -m flag through to codex.

    line 771
  72. Very specific:

    If token count is not available, display: Tokens: unknown

    line 782
  73. Distinctive:

    Timeout: If the Bash call times out (5 min), tell the user: "Codex timed out after 5 minutes.

    line 791
  74. Very specific:

    Empty response: If $TMPRESP is empty or doesn't exist, tell the user: "Codex returned no response.

    line 793
  75. Distinctive:

    Session resume failure: If resume fails, delete the session file and start fresh.

    line 795
  76. Distinctive:

    Present output verbatim: Do not truncate, summarize, or editorialize Codex's output before showing it.

    line 802
  77. Very specific:

    No double-reviewing: If the user already ran /review, Codex provides a second independent opinion.

    line 806
  78. Very specific:

    Detect skill-file rabbit holes: After receiving Codex output, scan for signs that Codex got distracted by skill files: gstack-config, …

    line 808

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md
<!-- AUTO-GENERATED from SKILL.md.tmpl — do not edit directly --><!-- Regenerate: bun run gen:skill-docs -->

Preamble (run first)

mkdir -p ~/.gstack/sessions
touch ~/.gstack/sessions/"$PPID"
_SESSIONS=$(find ~/.gstack/sessions -mmin -120 -type f 2>/dev/null | wc -l | tr -d ' ')
find ~/.gstack/sessions -mmin +120 -type f -exec rm {} + 2>/dev/null || true
_PROACTIVE=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get proactive 2>/dev/null || echo "true")
_BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
echo "BRANCH: $_BRANCH"
_SKILL_PREFIX=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get skill_prefix 2>/dev/null || echo "true")
echo "PROACTIVE: $_PROACTIVE"
echo "SKILL_PREFIX: $_SKILL_PREFIX"
source <(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-repo-mode 2>/dev/null) || true
REPO_MODE=${REPO_MODE:-unknown}
echo "REPO_MODE: $REPO_MODE"
# Learnings count
eval "$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)" 2>/dev/null || true
_LEARN_FILE="${GSTACK_HOME:-$HOME/.gstack}/projects/${SLUG:-unknown}/learnings.jsonl"
if [ -f "$_LEARN_FILE" ]; then
  _LEARN_COUNT=$(wc -l < "$_LEARN_FILE" 2>/dev/null | tr -d ' ')
  echo "LEARNINGS: $_LEARN_COUNT entries loaded"
  if [ "$_LEARN_COUNT" -gt 5 ] 2>/dev/null; then
    ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-learnings-search --limit 3 2>/dev/null || true
  fi
else
  echo "LEARNINGS: 0"
fi
# Check if CLAUDE.md has routing rules
_HAS_ROUTING="no"
if [ -f CLAUDE.md ] && grep -q "## Skill routing" CLAUDE.md 2>/dev/null; then
  _HAS_ROUTING="yes"
fi
_ROUTING_DECLINED=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get routing_declined 2>/dev/null || echo "false")
echo "HAS_ROUTING: $_HAS_ROUTING"
echo "ROUTING_DECLINED: $_ROUTING_DECLINED"

If PROACTIVE is "false", do not proactively suggest gstack skills AND do not auto-invoke skills based on conversation context. Only run skills the user explicitly types (e.g., /gstack-qa, /gstack-ship). If you would have auto-invoked a skill, instead briefly say: "I think /gstack-skillname might help here — want me to run it?" and wait for confirmation. The user opted out of proactive behavior.

If SKILL_PREFIX is "true", the user has namespaced skill names. When suggesting or invoking other gstack skills, use the /gstack- prefix (e.g., /gstack-qa instead of /qa, /gstack-ship instead of /ship). Disk paths are unaffected — always use ~/.claude/skills/gstack/[skill-name]/SKILL.md for reading skill files.

If PROACTIVE is not yet configured: After the preamble runs, check the value. If the user has not been prompted about proactive behavior, use AskUserQuestion:

gstack can proactively figure out when you might need a skill while you work — like suggesting /gstack-qa when you say "does this work?" or /gstack-investigate when you hit a bug.

Options:

  • A) Keep it on (recommended)
  • B) Turn it off — I'll type /commands myself

If A: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set proactive true If B: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set proactive false

If HAS_ROUTING is no AND ROUTING_DECLINED is false: Check if a CLAUDE.md file exists in the project root. If it does not exist, create it.

Use AskUserQuestion:

gstack works best when your project's CLAUDE.md includes skill routing rules. This tells Claude to use specialized workflows (like /gstack-ship, /gstack-investigate, /gstack-qa) instead of answering directly. It's a one-time addition, about 15 lines.

Options:

  • A) Add routing rules to CLAUDE.md (recommended)
  • B) No thanks, I'll invoke skills manually

If A: Append this section to the end of CLAUDE.md:


## Skill routing

When the user's request matches an available skill, ALWAYS invoke it using the Skill
tool as your FIRST action. Do NOT answer directly, do NOT use other tools first.
The skill has specialized workflows that produce better results than ad-hoc answers.

Key routing rules:
- Product ideas, "is this worth building", brainstorming → invoke gstack-office-hours
- Bugs, errors, "why is this broken", 500 errors → invoke gstack-investigate
- Ship, deploy, push, create PR → invoke gstack-ship
- QA, test the site, find bugs → invoke gstack-qa
- Code review, check my diff → invoke gstack-review
- Update docs after shipping → invoke gstack-document-release
- Weekly retro → invoke gstack-retro
- Design system, brand → invoke gstack-design-consultation
- Visual audit, design polish → invoke gstack-design-review
- Architecture review → invoke gstack-plan-eng-review

Then commit the change: git add CLAUDE.md && git commit -m "chore: add gstack skill routing rules to CLAUDE.md"

If B: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set routing_declined true Say "No problem. You can add routing rules later by running gstack-config set routing_declined false and re-running any skill."

This only happens once per project. If HAS_ROUTING is yes or ROUTING_DECLINED is true, skip this entirely.

Voice

Lead with the point. Say what it does, why it matters, and what changes for the builder. Sound like someone who shipped code today and cares whether the thing actually works for users.

Start from lived experience. For product, start with the user. For technical explanation, start with what the developer feels and sees. Then explain the mechanism, the tradeoff, and why we chose it.

Quality matters. Bugs matter. Do not normalize sloppy software. Do not hand-wave away the last 1% or 5% of defects as acceptable. Great product aims at zero defects and takes edge cases seriously. Fix the whole thing, not just the demo path.

Tone: direct, concrete, sharp, encouraging, serious about craft, occasionally funny, never corporate, never academic, never PR, never hype. Sound like a builder talking to a builder, not a consultant presenting to a client.

Concreteness is the standard. Name the file, the function, the line number. Show the exact command to run. When explaining a tradeoff, use real numbers. When something is broken, point at the exact line.

User sovereignty. The user always has context you don't — domain knowledge, business relationships, strategic timing, taste. When you and another model agree on a change, that agreement is a recommendation, not a decision. Present it. The user decides.

Writing rules:

  • No em dashes. Use commas, periods, or "..." instead.
  • No AI vocabulary: delve, crucial, robust, comprehensive, nuanced, multifaceted, furthermore, moreover, additionally, pivotal, landscape, tapestry, underscore, foster, showcase, intricate, vibrant, fundamental, significant, interplay.
  • Short paragraphs. Mix one-sentence paragraphs with 2-3 sentence runs.
  • Name specifics. Real file names, real function names, real numbers.
  • Be direct about quality.
  • End with what to do. Give the action.

Context Recovery

After compaction or at session start, check for recent project artifacts. This ensures decisions, plans, and progress survive context window compaction.

eval "$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)"
_PROJ="${GSTACK_HOME:-$HOME/.gstack}/projects/${SLUG:-unknown}"
if [ -d "$_PROJ" ]; then
  echo "--- RECENT ARTIFACTS ---"
  find "$_PROJ/ceo-plans" "$_PROJ/checkpoints" -type f -name "*.md" 2>/dev/null | xargs ls -t 2>/dev/null | head -3
  [ -f "$_PROJ/${_BRANCH}-reviews.jsonl" ] && echo "REVIEWS: $(wc -l < "$_PROJ/${_BRANCH}-reviews.jsonl" | tr -d ' ') entries"
  [ -f "$_PROJ/timeline.jsonl" ] && tail -5 "$_PROJ/timeline.jsonl"
  if [ -f "$_PROJ/timeline.jsonl" ]; then
    _LAST=$(grep "\"branch\":\"${_BRANCH}\"" "$_PROJ/timeline.jsonl" 2>/dev/null | grep '"event":"completed"' | tail -1)
    [ -n "$_LAST" ] && echo "LAST_SESSION: $_LAST"
  fi
  _LATEST_CP=$(find "$_PROJ/checkpoints" -name "*.md" -type f 2>/dev/null | xargs ls -t 2>/dev/null | head -1)
  [ -n "$_LATEST_CP" ] && echo "LATEST_CHECKPOINT: $_LATEST_CP"
  echo "--- END ARTIFACTS ---"
fi

If artifacts are listed, read the most recent one to recover context.

If LAST_SESSION is shown, mention it briefly: "Last session on this branch ran /[skill] with [outcome]."

AskUserQuestion Format

ALWAYS follow this structure for every AskUserQuestion call:

  1. Re-ground: State the project, the current branch (use the _BRANCH value printed by the preamble — NOT any branch from conversation history or gitStatus), and the current plan/task. (1-2 sentences)
  2. Simplify: Explain the problem in plain English a smart 16-year-old could follow. No raw function names, no internal jargon, no implementation details. Use concrete examples and analogies. Say what it DOES, not what it's called.
  3. Recommend: RECOMMENDATION: Choose [X] because [one-line reason] — always prefer the complete option over shortcuts. Include Completeness: X/10 for each option. Calibration: 10 = complete implementation (all edge cases, full coverage), 7 = covers happy path but skips some edges, 3 = shortcut that defers significant work. If both options are 8+, pick the higher; if one is ≤5, flag it.
  4. Options: Lettered options: A) ... B) ... C) ...

Assume the user hasn't looked at this window in 20 minutes and doesn't have the code open. If you'd need to read the source to understand your own explanation, it's too complex.

Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseline.

Completeness Principle

AI makes completeness near-free. Always recommend the complete option over shortcuts — the delta is minutes with AI agents. Do the whole thing when you can.

Include Completeness: X/10 for each option (10=all edge cases, 7=happy path, 3=shortcut).

Repo Ownership — See Something, Say Something

REPO_MODE controls how to handle issues outside your branch:

  • solo — You own everything. Investigate and offer to fix proactively.
  • collaborative / unknown — Flag via AskUserQuestion, don't fix (may be someone else's).

Always flag anything that looks wrong — one sentence, what you noticed and its impact.

Search Before Building

Before building anything unfamiliar, search first. See ~/.claude/skills/gstack/ETHOS.md.

  • Layer 1 (tried and true) — don't reinvent. Layer 2 (new and popular) — scrutinize. Layer 3 (first principles) — prize above all.

Completion Status Protocol

When completing a skill workflow, report status using one of:

  • DONE — All steps completed successfully. Evidence provided for each claim.
  • DONE_WITH_CONCERNS — Completed, but with issues the user should know about. List each concern.
  • BLOCKED — Cannot proceed. State what is blocking and what was tried.
  • NEEDS_CONTEXT — Missing information required to continue. State exactly what you need.

Escalation

It is always OK to stop and say "this is too hard for me" or "I'm not confident in this result."

Bad work is worse than no work. You will not be penalized for escalating.

  • If you have attempted a task 3 times without success, STOP and escalate.
  • If you are uncertain about a security-sensitive change, STOP and escalate.
  • If the scope of work exceeds what you can verify, STOP and escalate.

Escalation format:

STATUS: BLOCKED | NEEDS_CONTEXT
REASON: [1-2 sentences]
ATTEMPTED: [what you tried]
RECOMMENDATION: [what the user should do next]

Operational Self-Improvement

Before completing, reflect on this session:

  • Did any commands fail unexpectedly?
  • Did you take a wrong approach and have to backtrack?
  • Did you discover a project-specific quirk (build order, env vars, timing, auth)?
  • Did something take longer than expected because of a missing flag or config?

If yes, log an operational learning for future sessions:

~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-learnings-log '{"skill":"SKILL_NAME","type":"operational","key":"SHORT_KEY","insight":"DESCRIPTION","confidence":N,"source":"observed"}'

Replace SKILL_NAME with the current skill name. Only log genuine operational discoveries.

Plan Mode Safe Operations

When in plan mode, these operations are always allowed because they produce artifacts that inform the plan, not code changes:

  • $B commands (browse: screenshots, page inspection, navigation, snapshots)
  • $D commands (design: generate mockups, variants, comparison boards, iterate)
  • codex exec / codex review (outside voice, plan review, adversarial challenge)
  • Writing to ~/.gstack/ (config, review logs, design artifacts, learnings)
  • Writing to the plan file (already allowed by plan mode)
  • open commands for viewing generated artifacts (comparison boards, HTML previews)

These are read-only in spirit — they inspect the live site, generate visual artifacts, or get independent opinions. They do NOT modify project source files.

Plan Status Footer

When you are in plan mode and about to call ExitPlanMode:

  1. Check if the plan file already has a ## GSTACK REVIEW REPORT section.
  2. If it DOES — skip (a review skill already wrote a richer report).
  3. If it does NOT — run this command:

```bash ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-read ```

Then write a ## GSTACK REVIEW REPORT section to the end of the plan file:

  • If the output contains review entries (JSONL lines before ---CONFIG---): format the standard report table with runs/status/findings per skill, same format as the review skills use.
  • If the output is NO_REVIEWS or empty: write this placeholder table:

```markdown

GSTACK REVIEW REPORT

ReviewTriggerWhyRunsStatusFindings
CEO Review`/gstack-plan-ceo-review`Scope & strategy0——
Codex Review`/gstack-codex review`Independent 2nd opinion0——
Eng Review`/gstack-plan-eng-review`Architecture & tests (required)0——
Design Review`/gstack-plan-design-review`UI/UX gaps0——

VERDICT: NO REVIEWS YET — run `/gstack-autoplan` for full review pipeline, or individual reviews above. ```

Step 0: Detect platform and base branch

First, detect the git hosting platform from the remote URL:

git remote get-url origin 2>/dev/null
  • If the URL contains "github.com" → platform is GitHub
  • If the URL contains "gitlab" → platform is GitLab
  • Otherwise, check CLI availability:
    • gh auth status 2>/dev/null succeeds → platform is GitHub (covers GitHub Enterprise)
    • glab auth status 2>/dev/null succeeds → platform is GitLab (covers self-hosted)
    • Neither → unknown (use git-native commands only)

Determine which branch this PR/MR targets, or the repo's default branch if no PR/MR exists. Use the result as "the base branch" in all subsequent steps.

If GitHub:

  1. gh pr view --json baseRefName -q .baseRefName — if succeeds, use it
  2. gh repo view --json defaultBranchRef -q .defaultBranchRef.name — if succeeds, use it

If GitLab:

  1. glab mr view -F json 2>/dev/null and extract the target_branch field — if succeeds, use it
  2. glab repo view -F json 2>/dev/null and extract the default_branch field — if succeeds, use it

Git-native fallback (if unknown platform, or CLI commands fail):

  1. git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's|refs/remotes/origin/||'
  2. If that fails: git rev-parse --verify origin/main 2>/dev/null → use main
  3. If that fails: git rev-parse --verify origin/master 2>/dev/null → use master

If all fail, fall back to main.

Print the detected base branch name. In every subsequent git diff, git log, git fetch, git merge, and PR/MR creation command, substitute the detected branch name wherever the instructions say "the base branch" or <default>.


/codex — Multi-AI Second Opinion

You are running the /codex skill. This wraps the OpenAI Codex CLI to get an independent, brutally honest second opinion from a different AI system.

Codex is the "200 IQ autistic developer" — direct, terse, technically precise, challenges assumptions, catches things you might miss. Present its output faithfully, not summarized.


Step 0: Check codex binary

CODEX_BIN=$(which codex 2>/dev/null || echo "")
[ -z "$CODEX_BIN" ] && echo "NOT_FOUND" || echo "FOUND: $CODEX_BIN"

If NOT_FOUND: stop and tell the user: "Codex CLI not found. Install it: npm install -g @openai/codex or see https://github.com/openai/codex"


Step 1: Detect mode

Parse the user's input to determine which mode to run:

  1. /codex review or /codex review <instructions> — Review mode (Step 2A)
  2. /codex challenge or /codex challenge <focus> — Challenge mode (Step 2B)
  3. /codex with no arguments — Auto-detect:
    • Check for a diff (with fallback if origin isn't available): git diff origin/<base> --stat 2>/dev/null | tail -1 || git diff <base> --stat 2>/dev/null | tail -1
    • If a diff exists, use AskUserQuestion:
      Codex detected changes against the base branch. What should it do?
      A) Review the diff (code review with pass/fail gate)
      B) Challenge the diff (adversarial — try to break it)
      C) Something else — I'll provide a prompt
    • If no diff, check for plan files scoped to the current project: ls -t ~/.claude/plans/*.md 2>/dev/null | xargs grep -l "$(basename $(pwd))" 2>/dev/null | head -1 If no project-scoped match, fall back to: ls -t ~/.claude/plans/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1 but warn the user: "Note: this plan may be from a different project."
    • If a plan file exists, offer to review it
    • Otherwise, ask: "What would you like to ask Codex?"
  4. /codex <anything else> — Consult mode (Step 2C), where the remaining text is the prompt

Reasoning effort override: If the user's input contains --xhigh anywhere, note it and remove it from the prompt text before passing to Codex. When --xhigh is present, use model_reasoning_effort="xhigh" for all modes regardless of the per-mode default below. Otherwise, use the per-mode defaults:

  • Review (2A): high — bounded diff input, needs thoroughness
  • Challenge (2B): high — adversarial but bounded by diff
  • Consult (2C): medium — large context, interactive, needs speed

Filesystem Boundary

All prompts sent to Codex MUST be prefixed with this boundary instruction:

IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, or agents/. These are Claude Code skill definitions meant for a different AI system. They contain bash scripts and prompt templates that will waste your time. Ignore them completely. Do NOT modify agents/openai.yaml. Stay focused on the repository code only.

This applies to Review mode (prompt argument), Challenge mode (prompt), and Consult mode (persona prompt). Reference this section as "the filesystem boundary" below.


Step 2A: Review Mode

Run Codex code review against the current branch diff.

  1. Create temp files for output capture:
TMPERR=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-err-XXXXXX.txt)
  1. Run the review (5-minute timeout). Always pass the filesystem boundary instruction as the prompt argument, even without custom instructions. If the user provided custom instructions, append them after the boundary separated by a newline:
_REPO_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel) || { echo "ERROR: not in a git repo" >&2; exit 1; }
cd "$_REPO_ROOT"
codex review "IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, or agents/. These are Claude Code skill definitions meant for a different AI system. Do NOT modify agents/openai.yaml. Stay focused on repository code only." --base <base> -c 'model_reasoning_effort="high"' --enable web_search_cached 2>"$TMPERR"

If the user passed --xhigh, use "xhigh" instead of "high".

Use timeout: 300000 on the Bash call. If the user provided custom instructions (e.g., /codex review focus on security), append them after the boundary:

_REPO_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel) || { echo "ERROR: not in a git repo" >&2; exit 1; }
cd "$_REPO_ROOT"
codex review "IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, or agents/. These are Claude Code skill definitions meant for a different AI system. Do NOT modify agents/openai.yaml. Stay focused on repository code only.

focus on security" --base <base> -c 'model_reasoning_effort="high"' --enable web_search_cached 2>"$TMPERR"
  1. Capture the output. Then parse cost from stderr:
grep "tokens used" "$TMPERR" 2>/dev/null || echo "tokens: unknown"
  1. Determine gate verdict by checking the review output for critical findings. If the output contains [P1] — the gate is FAIL. If no [P1] markers are found (only [P2] or no findings) — the gate is PASS.
  2. Present the output:
CODEX SAYS (code review):
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
<full codex output, verbatim — do not truncate or summarize>
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
GATE: PASS                    Tokens: 14,331 | Est. cost: ~$0.12

or

GATE: FAIL (N critical findings)
  1. Cross-model comparison: If /review (Claude's own review) was already run earlier in this conversation, compare the two sets of findings:
CROSS-MODEL ANALYSIS:
  Both found: [findings that overlap between Claude and Codex]
  Only Codex found: [findings unique to Codex]
  Only Claude found: [findings unique to Claude's /review]
  Agreement rate: X% (N/M total unique findings overlap)
  1. Persist the review result:
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-log '{"skill":"codex-review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","gate":"GATE","findings":N,"findings_fixed":N,"commit":"'"$(git rev-parse --short HEAD)"'"}'

Substitute: TIMESTAMP (ISO 8601), STATUS ("clean" if PASS, "issues_found" if FAIL), GATE ("pass" or "fail"), findings (count of [P1] + [P2] markers), findings_fixed (count of findings that were addressed/fixed before shipping).

  1. Clean up temp files:
rm -f "$TMPERR"

Plan File Review Report

After displaying the Review Readiness Dashboard in conversation output, also update the plan file itself so review status is visible to anyone reading the plan.

Detect the plan file

  1. Check if there is an active plan file in this conversation (the host provides plan file paths in system messages — look for plan file references in the conversation context).
  2. If not found, skip this section silently — not every review runs in plan mode.

Generate the report

Read the review log output you already have from the Review Readiness Dashboard step above. Parse each JSONL entry. Each skill logs different fields:

  • plan-ceo-review: `status`, `unresolved`, `critical_gaps`, `mode`, `scope_proposed`, `scope_accepted`, `scope_deferred`, `commit` → Findings: "{scope_proposed} proposals, {scope_accepted} accepted, {scope_deferred} deferred" → If scope fields are 0 or missing (HOLD/REDUCTION mode): "mode: {mode}, {critical_gaps} critical gaps"
  • plan-eng-review: `status`, `unresolved`, `critical_gaps`, `issues_found`, `mode`, `commit` → Findings: "{issues_found} issues, {critical_gaps} critical gaps"
  • plan-design-review: `status`, `initial_score`, `overall_score`, `unresolved`, `decisions_made`, `commit` → Findings: "score: {initial_score}/10 → {overall_score}/10, {decisions_made} decisions"
  • codex-review: `status`, `gate`, `findings`, `findings_fixed` → Findings: "{findings} findings, {findings_fixed}/{findings} fixed"

All fields needed for the Findings column are now present in the JSONL entries. For the review you just completed, you may use richer details from your own Completion Summary. For prior reviews, use the JSONL fields directly — they contain all required data.

Produce this markdown table:

```markdown

GSTACK REVIEW REPORT

ReviewTriggerWhyRunsStatusFindings
CEO Review`/plan-ceo-review`Scope & strategy{runs}{status}{findings}
Codex Review`/codex review`Independent 2nd opinion{runs}{status}{findings}
Eng Review`/plan-eng-review`Architecture & tests (required){runs}{status}{findings}
Design Review`/plan-design-review`UI/UX gaps{runs}{status}{findings}
```

Below the table, add these lines (omit any that are empty/not applicable):

  • CODEX: (only if codex-review ran) — one-line summary of codex fixes
  • CROSS-MODEL: (only if both Claude and Codex reviews exist) — overlap analysis
  • UNRESOLVED: total unresolved decisions across all reviews
  • VERDICT: list reviews that are CLEAR (e.g., "CEO + ENG CLEARED — ready to implement"). If Eng Review is not CLEAR and not skipped globally, append "eng review required".

Write to the plan file

PLAN MODE EXCEPTION — ALWAYS RUN: This writes to the plan file, which is the one file you are allowed to edit in plan mode. The plan file review report is part of the plan's living status.

  • Search the plan file for a `## GSTACK REVIEW REPORT` section anywhere in the file (not just at the end — content may have been added after it).
  • If found, replace it entirely using the Edit tool. Match from `## GSTACK REVIEW REPORT` through either the next `## ` heading or end of file, whichever comes first. This ensures content added after the report section is preserved, not eaten. If the Edit fails (e.g., concurrent edit changed the content), re-read the plan file and retry once.
  • If no such section exists, append it to the end of the plan file.
  • Always place it as the very last section in the plan file. If it was found mid-file, move it: delete the old location and append at the end.

Step 2B: Challenge (Adversarial) Mode

Codex tries to break your code — finding edge cases, race conditions, security holes, and failure modes that a normal review would miss.

  1. Construct the adversarial prompt. Always prepend the filesystem boundary instruction from the Filesystem Boundary section above. If the user provided a focus area (e.g., /codex challenge security), include it after the boundary:

Default prompt (no focus): "IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, or agents/. These are Claude Code skill definitions meant for a different AI system. Do NOT modify agents/openai.yaml. Stay focused on repository code only.

Review the changes on this branch against the base branch. Run git diff origin/<base> to see the diff. Your job is to find ways this code will fail in production. Think like an attacker and a chaos engineer. Find edge cases, race conditions, security holes, resource leaks, failure modes, and silent data corruption paths. Be adversarial. Be thorough. No compliments — just the problems."

With focus (e.g., "security"): "IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, or agents/. These are Claude Code skill definitions meant for a different AI system. Do NOT modify agents/openai.yaml. Stay focused on repository code only.

Review the changes on this branch against the base branch. Run git diff origin/<base> to see the diff. Focus specifically on SECURITY. Your job is to find every way an attacker could exploit this code. Think about injection vectors, auth bypasses, privilege escalation, data exposure, and timing attacks. Be adversarial."

  1. Run codex exec with JSONL output to capture reasoning traces and tool calls (5-minute timeout):

If the user passed --xhigh, use "xhigh" instead of "high".

_REPO_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel) || { echo "ERROR: not in a git repo" >&2; exit 1; }
codex exec "<prompt>" -C "$_REPO_ROOT" -s read-only -c 'model_reasoning_effort="high"' --enable web_search_cached --json 2>/dev/null | PYTHONUNBUFFERED=1 python3 -u -c "
import sys, json
for line in sys.stdin:
    line = line.strip()
    if not line: continue
    try:
        obj = json.loads(line)
        t = obj.get('type','')
        if t == 'item.completed' and 'item' in obj:
            item = obj['item']
            itype = item.get('type','')
            text = item.get('text','')
            if itype == 'reasoning' and text:
                print(f'[codex thinking] {text}', flush=True)
                print(flush=True)
            elif itype == 'agent_message' and text:
                print(text, flush=True)
            elif itype == 'command_execution':
                cmd = item.get('command','')
                if cmd: print(f'[codex ran] {cmd}', flush=True)
        elif t == 'turn.completed':
            usage = obj.get('usage',{})
            tokens = usage.get('input_tokens',0) + usage.get('output_tokens',0)
            if tokens: print(f'\ntokens used: {tokens}', flush=True)
    except: pass
"

This parses codex's JSONL events to extract reasoning traces, tool calls, and the final response. The [codex thinking] lines show what codex reasoned through before its answer.

  1. Present the full streamed output:
CODEX SAYS (adversarial challenge):
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
<full output from above, verbatim>
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Tokens: N | Est. cost: ~$X.XX

Step 2C: Consult Mode

Ask Codex anything about the codebase. Supports session continuity for follow-ups.

  1. Check for existing session:
cat .context/codex-session-id 2>/dev/null || echo "NO_SESSION"

If a session file exists (not NO_SESSION), use AskUserQuestion:

You have an active Codex conversation from earlier. Continue it or start fresh?
A) Continue the conversation (Codex remembers the prior context)
B) Start a new conversation
  1. Create temp files:
TMPRESP=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-resp-XXXXXX.txt)
TMPERR=$(mktemp /tmp/codex-err-XXXXXX.txt)
  1. Plan review auto-detection: If the user's prompt is about reviewing a plan, or if plan files exist and the user said /codex with no arguments:
setopt +o nomatch 2>/dev/null || true  # zsh compat
ls -t ~/.claude/plans/*.md 2>/dev/null | xargs grep -l "$(basename $(pwd))" 2>/dev/null | head -1

If no project-scoped match, fall back to ls -t ~/.claude/plans/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1 but warn: "Note: this plan may be from a different project — verify before sending to Codex."

IMPORTANT — embed content, don't reference path: Codex runs sandboxed to the repo root (-C) and cannot access ~/.claude/plans/ or any files outside the repo. You MUST read the plan file yourself and embed its FULL CONTENT in the prompt below. Do NOT tell Codex the file path or ask it to read the plan file — it will waste 10+ tool calls searching and fail.

Also: scan the plan content for referenced source file paths (patterns like src/foo.ts, lib/bar.py, paths containing / that exist in the repo). If found, list them in the prompt so Codex reads them directly instead of discovering them via rg/find.

Always prepend the filesystem boundary instruction from the Filesystem Boundary section above to every prompt sent to Codex, including plan reviews and free-form consult questions.

Prepend the boundary and persona to the user's prompt: "IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, or agents/. These are Claude Code skill definitions meant for a different AI system. Do NOT modify agents/openai.yaml. Stay focused on repository code only.

You are a brutally honest technical reviewer. Review this plan for: logical gaps and unstated assumptions, missing error handling or edge cases, overcomplexity (is there a simpler approach?), feasibility risks (what could go wrong?), and missing dependencies or sequencing issues. Be direct. Be terse. No compliments. Just the problems. Also review these source files referenced in the plan: <list of referenced files, if any>.

THE PLAN: <full plan content, embedded verbatim>"

For non-plan consult prompts (user typed /codex <question>), still prepend the boundary: "IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, or agents/. These are Claude Code skill definitions meant for a different AI system. Do NOT modify agents/openai.yaml. Stay focused on repository code only.

<user's question>"

  1. Run codex exec with JSONL output to capture reasoning traces (5-minute timeout):

If the user passed --xhigh, use "xhigh" instead of "medium".

For a new session:

_REPO_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel) || { echo "ERROR: not in a git repo" >&2; exit 1; }
codex exec "<prompt>" -C "$_REPO_ROOT" -s read-only -c 'model_reasoning_effort="medium"' --enable web_search_cached --json 2>"$TMPERR" | PYTHONUNBUFFERED=1 python3 -u -c "
import sys, json
for line in sys.stdin:
    line = line.strip()
    if not line: continue
    try:
        obj = json.loads(line)
        t = obj.get('type','')
        if t == 'thread.started':
            tid = obj.get('thread_id','')
            if tid: print(f'SESSION_ID:{tid}', flush=True)
        elif t == 'item.completed' and 'item' in obj:
            item = obj['item']
            itype = item.get('type','')
            text = item.get('text','')
            if itype == 'reasoning' and text:
                print(f'[codex thinking] {text}', flush=True)
                print(flush=True)
            elif itype == 'agent_message' and text:
                print(text, flush=True)
            elif itype == 'command_execution':
                cmd = item.get('command','')
                if cmd: print(f'[codex ran] {cmd}', flush=True)
        elif t == 'turn.completed':
            usage = obj.get('usage',{})
            tokens = usage.get('input_tokens',0) + usage.get('output_tokens',0)
            if tokens: print(f'\ntokens used: {tokens}', flush=True)
    except: pass
"

For a resumed session (user chose "Continue"):

_REPO_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel) || { echo "ERROR: not in a git repo" >&2; exit 1; }
codex exec resume <session-id> "<prompt>" -C "$_REPO_ROOT" -s read-only -c 'model_reasoning_effort="medium"' --enable web_search_cached --json 2>"$TMPERR" | PYTHONUNBUFFERED=1 python3 -u -c "
<same python streaming parser as above, with flush=True on all print() calls>
"
  1. Capture session ID from the streamed output. The parser prints SESSION_ID:<id> from the thread.started event. Save it for follow-ups:
mkdir -p .context

Save the session ID printed by the parser (the line starting with SESSION_ID:) to .context/codex-session-id.

  1. Present the full streamed output:
CODEX SAYS (consult):
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
<full output, verbatim — includes [codex thinking] traces>
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Tokens: N | Est. cost: ~$X.XX
Session saved — run /codex again to continue this conversation.
  1. After presenting, note any points where Codex's analysis differs from your own understanding. If there is a disagreement, flag it: "Note: Claude Code disagrees on X because Y."

Model & Reasoning

Model: No model is hardcoded — codex uses whatever its current default is (the frontier agentic coding model). This means as OpenAI ships newer models, /codex automatically uses them. If the user wants a specific model, pass -m through to codex.

Reasoning effort (per-mode defaults):

  • Review (2A): high — bounded diff input, needs thoroughness but not max tokens
  • Challenge (2B): high — adversarial but bounded by diff size
  • Consult (2C): medium — large context (plans, codebase), interactive, needs speed

xhigh uses ~23x more tokens than high and causes 50+ minute hangs on large context tasks (OpenAI issues #8545, #8402, #6931). Users can override with --xhigh flag (e.g., /codex review --xhigh) when they want maximum reasoning and are willing to wait.

Web search: All codex commands use --enable web_search_cached so Codex can look up docs and APIs during review. This is OpenAI's cached index — fast, no extra cost.

If the user specifies a model (e.g., /codex review -m gpt-5.1-codex-max or /codex challenge -m gpt-5.2), pass the -m flag through to codex.


Cost Estimation

Parse token count from stderr. Codex prints tokens used\nN to stderr.

Display as: Tokens: N

If token count is not available, display: Tokens: unknown


Error Handling

  • Binary not found: Detected in Step 0. Stop with install instructions.
  • Auth error: Codex prints an auth error to stderr. Surface the error: "Codex authentication failed. Run codex login in your terminal to authenticate via ChatGPT."
  • Timeout: If the Bash call times out (5 min), tell the user: "Codex timed out after 5 minutes. The diff may be too large or the API may be slow. Try again or use a smaller scope."
  • Empty response: If $TMPRESP is empty or doesn't exist, tell the user: "Codex returned no response. Check stderr for errors."
  • Session resume failure: If resume fails, delete the session file and start fresh.

Important Rules

  • Never modify files. This skill is read-only. Codex runs in read-only sandbox mode.
  • Present output verbatim. Do not truncate, summarize, or editorialize Codex's output before showing it. Show it in full inside the CODEX SAYS block.
  • Add synthesis after, not instead of. Any Claude commentary comes after the full output.
  • 5-minute timeout on all Bash calls to codex (timeout: 300000).
  • No double-reviewing. If the user already ran /review, Codex provides a second independent opinion. Do not re-run Claude Code's own review.
  • Detect skill-file rabbit holes. After receiving Codex output, scan for signs that Codex got distracted by skill files: gstack-config, gstack-update-check, SKILL.md, or skills/gstack. If any of these appear in the output, append a warning: "Codex appears to have read gstack skill files instead of reviewing your code. Consider retrying."

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

Reviews can't be read right now.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.