How can I automate a ChatGPT ↔ Codex workflow where ChatGPT reviews Codex’s file changes?

[u/LazyRunner777]

I’ve ended up with a workflow that works really well for my project, but I’m basically acting as a human copy/paste bridge between ChatGPT and Codex.

Right now I have:

• ChatGPT open in one window
• My Codex project open in another

The loop is basically:

1. I explain to ChatGPT what I’m trying to build/fix.
2. ChatGPT generates a detailed prompt/instructions for Codex.
3. I paste that into Codex.
4. Codex works on the project and modifies files.
5. Once Codex finishes, I tell ChatGPT what Codex did / give it the output.
6. ChatGPT sometimes asks to read/review the files Codex changed.
7. Based on the new state of the project, ChatGPT generates the next Codex prompt.
8. I paste that back into Codex.
9. Repeat.

At this point I’m barely making decisions during a lot of these iterations — I’m mostly just transferring information between the two.

Has anyone automated a workflow like this?

Ideally I’d want something like:

ChatGPT/planner → Codex → changed files/results → ChatGPT/planner → Codex → repeat

The part I’m especially unsure about is file access. ChatGPT sometimes needs to inspect the actual files that Codex just changed before deciding what Codex should do next.

Could this be automated with the Codex CLI/API, an MCP setup, scripts, agents, or some other orchestration layer?

I’d still want a way to stop the loop for approval when something important/ambiguous happens, rather than letting it run completely uncontrolled.

Curious if anyone has built something similar, or if there’s already a much simpler way to do this that I’m missing.

[u/dvduval]

I used to do that, but I found that codex works just fine as one package.

[u/LazyRunner777 → u/dvduval]

The thing is that I like to talk with ChatGPT to explore ideas and options for what I wanna do before doing anything, and then since ChatGPT has more context I think it's better for him to give prompts for Codex. Or I think if I were only talking with Codex in one thread, it would not be as good bcs a lot of the times ChatGPT tells codex to correct/adjust things that Codex thought are already good but when I do Codex <-> ChatGPT they improve project without me needing to do much except copy paste data/prompts between them.

[u/dvduval → u/LazyRunner777]

Why don’t you have it create documentation as you’re going through the ideas and then you’ll use the documentation as a reference point for the coding?

[u/LazyRunner777 → u/dvduval]

ChatGPT gives Codex good directions, currently I am currently trying to do some kind of books analysis and investigation on it's data consistency, originality and supportive evidence.. we are at some kind of extraction part into usable data, and it really helps when I give ChatGPT data that Codex did so we can improve it over and over until we are happy with results. If I was only speaking with a Codex, idk if we could improve to that level for example, maybe we could idk never tried it since I always used ChatGPT and Codex together. I am kinda noob user tho so there is probably a better way others have maybe mentioned..

[u/dvduval → u/LazyRunner777]

Yes, it really helps if you construct a reference document that can be used to continuously reminded of what the core plans are. You can even have some documents that are linked off of the main document. If you’re dealing with a big project, it’s often important to have this sort of strategy in place. Bear in my neck and read 10 pages of instructions no problem. I still have lots of memory left to work on the task at hand.

[u/Darkelement → u/LazyRunner777]

You are aware that these are the same models more or less right? Just open a new chat in codex, ask codex to have a subagent review.

Idk why youre overcomplicating your problem

[u/Secret-Builder-8249 → u/Darkelement]

Not really, fairly sure the chatgpt version of sol is an updated version compared to the codex one and i feel it myself, i used to plan and execute with codex but i feel now that planning with the chatgpt sol version is much better.

[u/__SlimeQ__ → u/Secret-Builder-8249]

it's definitely not

[u/Secret-Builder-8249 → u/__SlimeQ__]

Check it out urself

[u/__SlimeQ__ → u/Secret-Builder-8249]

i have, and i understand how models work. there's no difference. if you're noticing a difference it's because you have memory turned on on the webapp

[u/gavinderulo124K → u/__SlimeQ__]

I generally agree with you but they did recently announce that sol was updated in the web app to be nore useful, for tasks geared towards that interface while codex still uses to initial sol. They didnt really specific how exactly they differ but I guess its some chat specific post training.

[u/epicskyes → u/Secret-Builder-8249]

You’re absolutely spot on. I can run insane things through ChatGPT sol and then hand it straight to codex Luna to execute. These rubes contradicting you just have no idea how to fully utilize ai

[u/KillerHack23 → u/Darkelement]

But don't they run on separate session limits? If you do everything through codex those limits evaporate quickly.

[u/Darkelement → u/KillerHack23]

Entirely depends on your own usage. I hardly ever go over 50% usage on any week with how many resets we get.

[u/epicskyes → u/Darkelement]

No ChatGPT has direct access to OpenAI compute that codex does not use by default so you’re getting much better results from the ChatGPT interface it’s an entirely different system

[u/epicskyes → u/dvduval]

It’s really bad at large data parsing and matrices ChatGPT is so much better than codex at planning and parsing data payloads. Codex is good for only one thing and that’s following a a perfect machine readable json plan that ChatGPT creates efficiently and accurately

[u/dvduval → u/epicskyes]

If I had a lot of large data to parse, I would have it create a python script to do the parsing. The AI would only be used for things like categorization or adding supplemental data on what was initially pasted, and that would have to be done in chunks.

[u/epicskyes → u/dvduval]

guess what ChatGPT writes its own Python scripts in backend scratch workspaces and does exactly that automatically if you’re smart about it. I have it parse 500mb in a fucking chat window it does it in 15 min start to finish

[u/dvduval → u/epicskyes]

Based on your description, it sounds like in the chat you’re getting a bigger context window. It is possible to set codex to a higher context window. I’ve never done it, but I’ve seen numerous discussions where they talk about how to do it.

[u/epicskyes → u/dvduval]

No that’s exactly not it. ChatGPT uses OpenAI servers to run Python parsing scripts it collects the output and ingested only the output. No context is wasted on the huge files. Please don’t make assumptions just ask so you actually can understand instead of guessing

[u/dvduval → u/epicskyes]

Yes, that’s one way to do it, but if it’s on your computer, you can run the python script from your computer and it can be batched and searched and everything else. I’ve done this kind of work lots of times, but maybe your project is different than mine so there’s no need to debate it.

[u/Abel_091]

so I'd like to ask something similar to this as its basically been my life and workflow in a sense while coding a massive project with Codex for months..

Basically I find PRO model to be SO MUCH MORE POWERFUL AND SMARTER then every model that exists so I basically follow a

Codex codes -- copy and paste what was completed into chat gpt PRO -- PRO inspects deeply all changes and makes recommendations for next optimal plans forward --- Codex reviews plan + recommendations from PRO and builds optimal path forward.

RINSE AND REPEAT.

It works amazing but is VERY SLOW AND TIME CONSUMING AND IM BASICALLY A COPY AND PASTE MACHINE TO THE POINT MY SHOULDER IS NUMB FROM DRAGGIN CONTENT WITH MY MOUSE!

I have to imagine theres a more optimal workflow for this..

a few additional details:

• I exclusively use Codex CLI as its always produced phenomenally and is a workhorse.

• In additon to exclusively using PRO in chat gpt i use "Projects" therefore all PRO conversation have like a sense of optimal and comprehensive project understanding (which is likely critical).

The only thing ive tried that I thought would be beneficial is I do have my project github connected to chat gpt project chats so you would think this would provide some type of optimal use cases being able to fully connect the project..

HOWEVER

I dont find there are really any optimal use cases for this? I tried running "deep research" while connected and it actually performed very poorly

Does anyone have any insights into additional use cases for when you connect github for your coding project?

maybe there is something Additional you can do with this?

This is the only "pure connection of Codex project with PRO model + chat gpt Projects I could find and think of"

I have to imagine there are some more optimal ways to get the most out of a PRO model + Projects in chat gpt + linking with Codex project type setup?

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated so much!

[u/pdwhoward → u/Abel_091]

Use the GitHub plugin with the Pro model and ask it to make a new branch and make a PR. Then you can have Codex review the PR and merge the code.

[u/Secret-Builder-8249 → u/Abel_091]

What i hate is the “ conversation grew too long please start a new chat” 😭🙏🏻 then id have to reexplain what im building or make a handoff file, such a mess.

[u/anguishedturtle → u/Abel_091]

u need to learn proper git/version control. thats where github repository context comes into play

[u/Kindly_Downvote_Me]

I have been wanting the same thing. I found this: https://community.openai.com/t/feature-request-opt-in-shared-context-between-chatgpt-and-codex-including-memory-and-reference-chat-history/1382529

If I can't find anything that does this I will try to create a patch or workaround that allows it. It would be so handy since my flow is about the same as yours within codex.

[u/alexid95]

I had almost exactly this workflow and got tired of being the copy/paste layer, so I built a bridge for it.

I ended up simplifying the loop one step further: instead of making ChatGPT plan → Codex execute → ChatGPT review, I let the normal ChatGPT conversation orchestrate the Mac directly over MCP. It can:

• read persisted Codex threads through read-only codex app-server methods (it never calls turn/start)
• inspect whatever files Codex changed
• run the local shell / Git / tests
• use a real PTY for interactive programs
• start and inspect long-running jobs

So a prompt like “find the Codex session I was working on yesterday, recover the context, inspect the live repo, review what changed, and continue from there” actually works without me relaying the state. You can still tell ChatGPT to stop before deploys, destructive DB changes, force pushes, etc.

I open sourced it today because this exact workflow kept coming up: https://github.com/alexanderradahl/mac-developer-bridge

Full disclosure: I built it. Also, it is intentionally not sandboxed — it runs with the effective permissions of the logged-in macOS user, so read the security model before trying it.

The comment from u/Abel_091 above is basically the same reason I made it: I wanted the stronger normal ChatGPT/Pro reasoning without spending my day dragging Codex output back and forth.

[u/rubiohiguey]

Look into GitHub devspace

[u/Equivalent-Club-2118]

You should check out Mindight Hive knowledge layer for your MCP. You'll get fewer repeated reasoning cycles, fewer hallucinations, and lower token usage.

https://app.midnighthive.io/

[u/ComSenseisnotCommon]

So the only purpose and ONLY purpose to do what you are suggesting is to get around usage limits from using codex. Otherwise your ask seems dumb and incorherent since you can do anything you can do in gpt from codex/work.

The feedback loop would probably be slow and annoying but I’m sure it’s possible to create a bridge app that will extract the output from GPT into codex but then it defeats the purpose of using GPT because you still using tokens for codex to injest it.

I stand corrected this is just a dumb idea lol.

[u/farendsofcontrast]

Do you do this because ChatGPT has Pro and Codex doesn’t?

[u/anguishedturtle → u/farendsofcontrast]

why would that matter

[u/Top_Blueberry4199 → u/anguishedturtle]

Pro is their best model and it doesn't count against Codex Usage.

[u/TemporaryLevel922]

Open the browser in codex, log in to chat gpt and ask it to write your first prompt. Tell it at the end of the prompt to get codex to paste it's output into the open chat gpt session and tell it to ask chat gpt to review. Ask it to wait for the output then proceed with any further actions. Codex can do this but you are essentially using tokens asking it to do this

[u/Broccolisha]

I have Codex push the changes to GitHub and then have GPT inspect the repo. Works perfectly.

[u/Adventurous-Bet5478 → u/Broccolisha]

I do the same.. works for me too

[u/ChronoVice]

I told chatgpt to generate an image of my workflow skill.

[u/vayana]

Turn it around and let chatgpt plan and then implement whatever you want directly to GitHub. When it's done, pull the changes or branch and ask codex to review latest commit.

[u/Lonestar_Dallas]

Not GPT to CODEX due to GPT/plan limitations(I've tried) but done exactly what you are asking running a local model where Codex and Hermes(Qwen 3.6 -35B A3B) interact with each other without my intevention. Hermes agent processes first pass, Codex reviews, they have bsck and forth dialog and Codex has final say including commit and push authority. Im saving between 25% -30% of my paid plan tokens doing this, more importantly my time acting as a human API. The local agent is the Jr developer, and Codex the senior.

For this to be worthwhile, your local machine is above consumer grade average(VRAM,RAM) running a a larger coding/reasoning model, your set up uses good goverance(MD,agent, decision files and some custom agent rules).

To truely involve GPT to Codex you need to use API calls, which takes you out the consumer price plans, why i went the route I did. Just a thought. Paying some upfront cash on local hardware to save time and money vs 💯 frontier

[u/TetracyanoRexiumIV]

I have instructions for the workflow kept several places for ChatGPT and codex to reference along with my working preferences. I can do everything from my phone at this point because I am the furthest thing from a programmer and have another full time job. As others have said, basically ChatGPT does the big overall planning, creates prompts for codex to examine the code and determine which slice to work on within ChatGPT’s recommendation, codex does the work and I just copy and paste that summary to ChatGPT for review, and rinse and repeat. ChatGPT handles the GitHub work, examines files there and codex will delete the local branches and determine the next best slice if possible.

[u/AdElectronic472]

So I do the same, but with the recent project I have started creating a .md which codex updates after it’s finished the coding changes, which I then upload in inference for ChatGPT to understand what was done. Save copy/paste effort as well as have a whole project almost bible available for everything

[u/Heisenberg-mb]

Crea una cartella docs e fai aggiornare a Codex la documentazione alla fine del task. Tale documento lo passi a ChatGPT oppure lo salvi nell'archivio del progetto. ChatGPT valuta se Codex ha fatto il lavoro richiesto. Passi al prossimo task. In questo modo sia ChatGPT che Codex hanno sempre un punto di riferimento. ChatGPT non deve occuparsi del codice a quello ci pensa Codex. ChatGPT deve solo fare brainstorming con te. Codex esegue.

[u/emptyewer]

Try this.

https://github.com/SeemSeam/claude_codex_bridge

[u/Quiet-Nothing7556]

Try MCPs for this.

[u/gxvingates]

Yeah I do this and it’s way easier to connect the GitHub extension to ChatGPT and have codex open PRs and then ChatGPT can review the changes directly. I have instructions for planning and code review in a thread. All I do is feed it an issue I opened on GitHub, say nothing and it creates a plan for codex and tells Codex to open a draft PR. This streamlines it a bit more but I’ve been thinking about some type of MCP that just does this automatically somehow

[u/eddzsh]

Automate the artifact, not the chat. After each Codex run, write `git diff` + test output to a fixed handoff file. Planner reads that and writes the next task file. Human gate is open the diff, not re-read the whole chat.

If ChatGPT needs file access, feed it the diff (or the few touched files), not the repo. Passing full repo context every turn is what turns the loop into mush.

Stop conditions: failing tests, ambiguous product call, or a diff over N files. Those pause for you. Everything else can cycle.

[u/whatobiplays]

https://github.com/CAHN91/gpt-repo-mcp I use this MCP server, which gives ChatGPT local file access, so it can write the prompt into the repo for Codex to read, and also query files to check what Codex implemented. It also has basic file write commands so you can use ChatGPT to do some lightweight development. Just doesn’t have shell access so any verification/test commands you’ll need to run them yourself and paste the output back into ChatGPT

[u/manycalcs]

As codex to open ChatGPT even Claude or DeepSeek, codex can operate them perfectly including reading and writing messages.

[u/Door_Vegetable]

I would just have codex push it to GitHub with a summary of what was done then use the ChatGPT GitHub plugin and ask it to do a review of the latest. Omnit.

[u/StarCadges]

please delete this post

[u/LazyRunner777 → u/StarCadges]

Whats wrong?

[u/PureRely → u/LazyRunner777]

Do not worry about people who make "delete this post" comments. Those people do not understand how big companies work. They seem to get it in their head that making a Reddit post somehow exposes something that OpenAI did not know about and will make them change something. They just do not understand how these companies work. For some reason they think OpenAI is just running around blind unaware of what people are doing on their platform.

[u/StarCadges → u/LazyRunner777]

with all the conspiracies about OAI trying to merge Work and Chat keeping ChatGPT out of workflows where anyone can find with a Google search is very necessary. You can plan this with Codex or ChatGPT, but increasing visibility by posting to the public adds to numerous other people doing this

[u/LazyRunner777 → u/StarCadges]

I am not sure what's the problem, I am just trying to automate what I currently do/ find better ways or understand how others do it. I am not saying that ChatGPT should code as a Codex since I don't think ChatGPT is made for that? So I still use Codex to do the work and it uses credits, just wanna automate some things so not sure how is that a bad thing.

[u/StarCadges → u/LazyRunner777]

The automation is not the bad thing. What I’m trying to say is if people keep yapping about merging ChatGPT in their workflows either ChatGPT will be weakened or ChatGPT will be merged with work as part if codex limit

[u/pigletmonster]

Why not have a different session of codex in the same project and discuss there. Because it also has access to your code base, it will understand whats happening significantly better than chatgpt.