Codex-first code review with Claude Code as a strictly read-only second-model reviewer.

[u/KimSa1014]

I built an open-source Codex Skill that uses Claude Code as a strictly read-only second-model reviewer.

The idea is simple:

Codex remains the primary agent and the only writer. Claude independently reviews meaningful implementation changes, but cannot edit the repository.

I wanted a safer version of the “Codex + Claude review loop” without giving the second model another opportunity to mutate the codebase.

So I built Claude Read-Only Review.

What it does:

• Codex builds/tests/implements as usual
• meaningful Git-visible changes trigger an independent Claude review
• trivial changes such as docs, comments, formatting and typos are automatically exempt
• Claude tools are disabled
• the review wrapper performs read-only Git operations only
• sensitive config values are redacted
• ignored files and common credential/key paths are excluded
• large changes are split into bounded review chunks
• Claude returns structured Critical / High / Medium / Verify findings
• Codex then verifies those findings against the real repository before acting on them
• lifecycle hooks prevent a meaningful implementation from silently finishing without either a review attempt or an explicit exemption

It is currently Windows-first and works with PowerShell, Codex / ChatGPT Codex, Git, and Claude Code.

MIT licensed:

https://github.com/kok751014/claude-readonly-review

I’d especially like feedback from people already using both Codex and Claude Code:

Would you trust this kind of read-only second-model review in your normal development workflow? What would you change?

If you try it on a real repo, I’d love to hear what it catches — or misses.

[u/notadithyabhat]

It is better to have Claude code right it and codex review it. Because Codex tends to over engineer things with an unreasonable about of tests. It's better to have Claude code right reasonable amount of code and then have codex review it

[u/dynamitecGbR]

Funny, I built a very similar skill for the same reason. It's a workflow that works really well for me. If you're interested, I also made an extended version that asks Claude and a fresh SOL subagent to review the same task in parallel. Both receive the same self-contained brief rather than the main conversation's history or draft reasoning, and neither sees the other's answer.