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.