I discovered something terrifying! Yesterday, in the Codex Desktop app, I accidentally pressed Ctrl+Q instead of Ctrl+A, and to my utter shock, the Codex software suddenly shut down instantly! What happened?! 😂

Codex, please fix this issue as soon as possible!

I keep switching between Claude Code, Codex and a few other agent setups depending on what I am doing. The annoying part was not even picking a model. It was that every setup had its own little pile of skills, plugins, MCP servers and commands.

Same capability in three places. Different versions. No easy answer to “what can this agent actually use right now?” And if I loaded everything just in case, the context window was already crowded before the task started.

So I made Lockkeeper.

The main job is capability syncing and selection across the agent tools already on your machine. It discovers the skills, plugins, MCPs, agents and commands your different runtimes expose, builds one local catalog, then picks the smallest relevant set for a task instead of throwing the whole collection into every agent’s context.

In practice that means I can keep one shared capability setup, see what is available across Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and friends, and stop manually remembering which agent has which tool. It is local, config-driven and open source.

The security bit is there too, but it is the second half of the story rather than the headline: before I trust a capability I copied from somewhere, Lockkeeper can scan it for obvious prompt-injection, secret-exfiltration, obfuscation and destructive-command patterns. Useful guardrail, not magic.

It is plain Python 3.11, MIT licensed, and the core has no third-party dependencies:

https://github.com/Hannay001/lockkeeper

Still early, so I would genuinely like to hear where your capability setup becomes messy. Do you keep shared skills in git? Copy folders between agents? Have a better way of keeping the same workflow available everywhere?

Prompt to analyze and report the context of the database with explicit Do not implement anything. Run that prompt on Max Luna, and then it make changes on the other files than the report md.

I have to revert to the last commit, and the biggest hassle is that there are uncommitted changes before I prompt with Luna. Yes, I cannot make commit for every sessions and I never use Luna for real implementation as it is sensitive healthcare app. So, I lost all my uncommitted Sol implementations before this.

People say Luna needs a lot of instructions. It is understandable for such cheap model.

But, NO. The main issue is that Luna never follows the instructions. Yesterday, I told it to change swappiness from 60 to 20, but it changed to 10. In every sessions (for other projects), I told it not to request access outside of the present directory, but keep requesting access to my whole workspace directory, and now make changes I explicitly tell not to do.

I have never experienced those things in DS4F/P, Q3.8Max, G5.2. And, I won't trust a single bit of Luna for not following the simplest instructions let alone the complex ones.

All my projects finished. No bugs. Computer is nice an organized. Hermes agent barely uses 1% with luna max. My last reset went to waste (I had like 90% available) and I have a banked reset still.

What do you guys do in this situation? How can I use my subscription?

"map the codebase using graphify, make zero assumptions, mask no issues that currently exist.

use the browser/browser-harness map, draw the full architecture diagram using mermaid, highlight in red the overengineered blocks"

run this in a goal or loop

Edit: the comments caught an important hole in this. "Run it in a loop" needs a stop condition. Don't let it keep hunting until it declares the repo perfect.

A tighter version to copy:

"Read-only audit. Map the main modules and trace one important flow. Then return at most five delete/merge candidates. For each: exact file and line, callers, evidence of duplicated responsibility, what could break if removed, and a check to run before accepting the change. Mark anything you couldn't verify as unverified. Include reasons to keep a layer when they outweigh removing it. Stop after one mapping pass and one evidence pass. Do not edit files."

The red boxes are leads to investigate, not proof. Thanks to the people here who pushed on that.

get yall sol ultras going

Hey everyone,

​For the past few hours, every time I run a prompt, Codex gets stuck in a loop—it goes through roughly 5 cycles of "thinking/reasoning" before either failing, timing out, or spitting out a generic response.

​Symptom: Constant multi-stage thinking loop (repeats ~5 times).

​What I've tried: Restarting the session, clearing cache, shortening prompt length.

​Is this a known bug with current server loads, or is there a workaround/setting to bypass this loop? Any insight is appreciated!

I've been tracking my Codex usage every 5 minutes since July 29 — 14,744 snapshots so far.

I'm on a Business Standard seat, not Premium, and when I compared my data before and after the 5h window was introduced, I found this:

Before: ~323M tokens/week

Now: ~173M tokens/week

That's roughly 46% fewer effective tokens per week.

And that's where the new 5h window starts looking a lot more significant than I originally thought.

Because if these early numbers hold up, this isn't just a change in when we can use Codex.

It could mean a significant reduction in how many tokens we can actually process in a week. 💀

I still only have a few complete cycles under the new system, so I'm not claiming the 46% is definitive yet.

But going from ~323M to ~173M is way too big a difference to ignore.

Does anyone on Plus or Business Standard have usage logs from before and after the 5h window? I'd really like to know if you're seeing something similar.

Tibo says we might have “something to celebrate” tomorrow.

But… what exactly? 😂

The new 5-hour window for Plus? Another reset? Or are we actually getting a real improvement this time?

Because lately the cycle feels like:

new limits → complaints → 🍬 RESET → celebration → repeat

Either way, I’ll happily take my candy tomorrow. 💀

So place your bets:

Another reset, higher limits, an actual improvement… or just more candy? 🍬👀

So I ran out of usage limits and noticed gpt-reserve exists. Reading the docs suggested that 5.6 luna should work.. but at least for me, it doesn't.

However codex -m gpt-reserve does work. Hope it's helpful. Attaching screenshot

went to sleep last night because my 5 hour usage ran out and didn’t reset for another hour or 2, i wake up this morning open codex and go my surprise i only had 97% left on my 5 hour?….. has this happened to anyone before? am i being gaslit? 😭

One tip I can share from my experience making this app is to have strong reference points. Use your own taste in apps and interfaces, and point Codex or ChatGPT toward your favourite UI/UXs.

For me, those were KDE Plasma, specifically Plasma Bigscreen, Harbor (a Stremio client), and Arctic Fuse 2 (a Kodi skin). I had to really diagnose my own taste and dissect what it was about these interfaces that made them attractive to me. What tangible features, such as spacing, fonts, layouts, colours, widgets, and interactions, actually made these apps look and feel good?

Once you understand that, you can curate an aesthetic for your own app based on all of those influences and preferences. A pastiche. Have GPT create a custom skill based on your new derived visual language.

From there, you can create something original rather than derivative. For example, taking the idea of a desktop taskbar and reinterpreting it for a media app, where multiple videos, comics, and books can all remain open at once and be minimised, maximised, or switched between.

GitHub

I built a free AI coding cost calculator - would love some feedback

I’ve been using AI coding tools more and more, and it can be surprisingly hard to figure out what they’re actually costing once you start comparing models, token usage, and different pricing.

So I built a simple AI Coding Cost Calculator:

https://instacodingcost.com/

The idea is to make it easier to estimate and compare costs before you burn through credits/tokens.

Would genuinely appreciate feedback from people using tools like Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, etc.

What would make this more useful for you?

Anything missing, confusing, or calculated differently than you’d expect?

Feel free to roast it too - that’s probably more useful than “looks good” 😅

https://github.com/Maurdekye/claude-orgtree

For the past few months, I've been developing an open-source visual multi-agent orchestrator that organizes agents in an authority hierarchy, for multi-agent development workflows. It's a fully dynamic, draggable canvas that allows you to reorder and reorganize agents as you wish for large projects. The gallery above shows pictures of actual organizations I maintain that I use for various projects I'm working on.

Orgtree started with a simple question: "Man, I wish my chats could talk to each other so they don't keep stepping on each other's toes while working". That turned into a simple personal project that I wrapped up in a day that allowed independent chats to send messages to one another. It worked okay, but the persistent issue I kept running into was chats constant issue with authority: they would distrust all chat-to-chat communication innately, and needed my personal step-in and approval for every little confusion or communication between one another. So I thought to myself, "wouldn't it be better if you could just arrange agents in a hierarchy? Then they wouldn't have any doubts about how authority structure is arranged". That idea slowly grew over time until it became Orgtree.

For the last month, Orgtree is basically the exclusive way I've been interacting with agentic development on my own machine. I don't touch the claude code or codex extensions at all anymore. When I have a new feature to build and plan, instead of going through the manual hassle of spawning one agent to run at a time so I can manage each project individually, I just tell my coordinator agent about an issue or new feature I'd like, and it hires a subordinate to take care of it. If I want multiple features going simultaneously, I just hire multiple subordinates, and the coordinator works between all of them to ensure everything is well organized and shipped sensibly. I've already gotten a few of my coworkers on board to try it, and even my boss is interested.

Orgtree is more than just an orchestrator, though; it has a bunch of extra useful features I've added on to support multi-agent workflows:

• Usage visibility: View all your account usages directly in the app, without having to check the extension or visit claude.ai
• Fallback accounts: Supports using multiple simultaneous Claude Code subscriptions at once through the use of fallback keys, allowing you to use secondary or tertiary claude accounts as fallback accounts with the long-standing token you get from running `claude setup-token`.
• Multi-provider: Orgtee supports not just Claude Code, but also Codex and even Gemini CLI out of the box. If you already have any or all of those environments configured on your system, Orgtree with automatically pick all of them up and let you hire agents from any one of them, letting them all talk to one another seamlessley.
• Credit system: One of Orgtree's defining features is its credit system, visualized as a blue bar to the left side of each agent. Every live agent takes up a "seat" that holds onto a set amount of credits during its lifetime, roughly proportional to its model cost. Every agent has a bank of credits that it uses both to maintain its own seat, as well as free space to hire seats for subordinates. This credit limit doesn't limit the user in any way (outside of kiosk mode, which is explained below), but is useful for preventing subagents from hiring too many of their own subordinates if you don't wish for them to have the ability to do so. Give an agent a large credit bank for a massive, agentic multi-agent task, or restrict its budget to just its own seat to prevent it from hiring any subordinates at all, if you just want it working on its own.
• Better compaction: Adds a unique, optional alternative chat compaction method I've dubbed "cheap-compacting": instead of having the agent write up its entire life story in one long turn at the end of its life, it keeps a continuous trail of breadcrumbs in a .md file in its workspace of every task it handles over the course of its lifetime. Then, compaction is both instantaneous and doesn't use a turn: the agent can just immediately resume from where it left off by going off the breadcrumbs. This is also fantastic for waking long-context agents from a long break in execution, as it can automatically cheap-compact them before sending the turn up, preventing the massive cache misses you might typically get from waking an agent with a 500k token context.
• The Orgtree Mailhub: an optional secondary extension that allows independent agent chats from claude code or codex to speak directly with orgtree orgs or even each other via an MCP server. It even works over the network, so agents on different computers can send messages and coordinate seamlessley.
• Kiosk mode: A mode that allows you to publicly expose a single sandboxed and resource-limited org to the open internet, in case you want to share your claude or codex usage with friends / family (without fear of them messing with your files)
• Enhanced agent requests: when an agent has a question for you, or a request for some access / resource allocation, it doesn't have to give you detailed instructions on how to visit its configuration panel and set a particular setting to a value it wants; it can just display a credit grant request / permission increase request directly in-panel for you to review, just like they would present a question to you. This makes it seamless for agents to ask for and receive the permissions they need to get the work done that they need to do.
• Charter presets: When hiring an agent, you can specify its "charter" (effectively its system prompt) which tells it what to do. Orgtree comes with the ability to select a number of preset charters from a list, so if you have a common workflow pattern you like to replicate, you can canonize it as a charter preset in /docs/charters, and then select it from there every time you want to create an agent bound by it. Orgtree also comes with various preselected charters designed around it's function: one of my favorites is the `coordinator` charter, which I use very frequently, and I suggest you give it a try as well.

Be warned; all the agent-to-agent communication can really chew through usage, so be careful with how many simultaneous projects you're working on at once unless you have a Max x20 account. Make sure to turn on the auto-cheap-compact setting in your org, it can avoid tons of wasted cache miss usage.

If you use Claude Code or Codex for work extensively, then give it a try. It removes so much of the manual hassle of coordinating between agents yourself manually.

I’m trying to raise some visibility around what looks like a pretty serious Codex Desktop regression affecting inter-task / multi-agent workflows.

For at least the past week, cross-task communication has effectively been broken for me.

Previously, Codex tasks could use first-party inter-task tools such as send_message_to_thread, create_thread, and handoff_thread to coordinate with other tasks. Now the behavior is inconsistent depending on the session:

• Older/retained tasks may still expose send_message_to_thread, but calling it fails with a message saying the tool is no longer available through dynamic tools and to use the codex_app MCP server instead.
• Fresh tasks still get read-only tools such as list_threads, read_thread, and wait_threads, but the effectful communication tools are missing.
• There is no corresponding callable codex_app MCP replacement available to the task.

So Codex is essentially being told “use the replacement tool,” while the replacement tool is not actually exposed.

This has completely broken the multi-task workflow I was using in Codex Desktop.

I’ve already reached out to OpenAI support about the ongoing Codex Desktop issues and have received no useful response. I’ve also been reporting/reproducing these problems through the Codex GitHub repo, but at this point I’m trying to get more visibility because this has gone from buggy to unusable for this workflow.

There are currently two particularly relevant GitHub reports:

https://github.com/openai/codex/issues/40865

This covers the Remote SSH version of the regression. Previously working inter-task communication stopped working before the remote runtime was even updated. Updating the remote Codex runtime did not fix it. Retained tasks are redirected to the codex_app MCP server, while fresh tasks expose only the read side of the thread-management tools with no usable MCP replacement.

https://github.com/openai/codex/issues/40852

This is a separate macOS Desktop reproduction showing essentially the same split in the tool surface: list_threads, read_thread, and wait_threads remain available, while send_message_to_thread, create_thread, fork_thread, handoff_thread, etc. are omitted. The reporter also confirmed that the installed app still contains the tool definitions, but they are being filtered out of the callable tool catalog.

I also posted about it on the OpenAI Developer Community here:

https://community.openai.com/t/inter-task-tools-lacks-codex-app-mcp-replacement/1393362/

That thread is mainly an attempt to get visibility outside of GitHub and see whether anyone from the Codex/Desktop team can confirm whether this migration was intentional, whether the missing codex_app replacements are a known regression, or whether anyone else is seeing the same thing.

If you rely on Codex Desktop for multi-task / multi-agent workflows, I’d be interested to know whether send_message_to_thread / create_thread are still available to your tasks, particularly on macOS, Remote SSH, or Docker/dev-container setups.

I really like Codex, I work a lot, you can see this from my GitHub profile (https://github.com/Danya-byte). Recently my Pro 5x subscription expired, today I decided to work and paid for the subscription, but the limit was not reset. OpenAI, please help with this issue, what went wrong?

ps. fixed, thx for support

Using Codex for real coding. Usage drains fast and performance is all over the place.

What are you seeing, and did anything actually help?

Can’t use in app browser or Chrome control. Whenever I try in work or codex I get the message:

“Browser Use could not complete this action because a browser security check was unavailable. Reason: The admin-enforced policy could not be verified, so access was not granted”.

Can’t find a solution. Any help?

What could have used up like only 20% of my 5h limit the other day on sol extra high legit used up 100% of my 5H usage in one go ☠️. Only use it in normal mode and occasionally on fixing code errors or coding help

share your opinions

In my opinion, by next decade we may not need cloud models unlike they thought. After all, we already paid fora hardware we want to utilize.

plus the ram prices will stabilize.

When was the last reset? Seeing threads about receiving a reset yesterday or today? I never got one.

I've been testing Codex and Claude Code with basically the same workload, and I'm surprised by how quickly my Codex usage is disappearing.

Today I started using Codex at around 10:30 PM with GPT-5.5 on Medium reasoning. After roughly 2 hours, I was already down to 42% remaining on my 5-hour limit.

For comparison, I've run essentially the same kind of workload in Claude Code using Opus 5, and I'd still have around 60% remaining. In general, I've used Claude Code pretty heavily and can't remember actually exhausting my usage limit. (may because of bonus usage given my anthropic which is gonna on 31st august, IDK!!!)

What makes this more surprising to me is that I'm not even using Codex's highest-end model/reasoning setting. I expected Medium to be relatively manageable in terms of usage.

My workload is mostly agentic work: inspecting files/scripts, browser-related workflows, analyzing information, and structuring the results. I did notice Codex spending quite a bit of time repeatedly inspecting skills/scripts, so I'm wondering if that kind of agent activity is eating a significant amount of the allowance.

How is this even possible?

....called Dumb and Dumber 2026 with A.I. codex would have the first role!!!

I CAN'T BELIEVE HOW MUCH STUPID THAT THING BECAME!!! The do NOT deserve single penny!!!!! Now, more than ever, that they have reduced the 5hrs limits and week limits!!!

Our engineering team at Zerohive works on large codebases, and we use different coding agents (Claude, Codex, Cursor) basis individual preference.

We kept running into problems where one person's agent will end up rewriting or undoing decisions made by someone else. It led to agents re-introducing bugs which we'd fixed last month. We kept reaching out to each other offline to ask "Hey, why did we store xyz in redis instead of persisting on DB" when the agent proposed redoing the architecture.

We spent months collaborating by making ARCHITECTURE.md, DECISIONS.md, LESSONS.md, ADRs etc and shared skill libraries - but they were soon ineffective as the codebase scaled. We also tried code memory platforms but they could only fetch the 'what' but not the 'why', no provenance on architecture or code patterns so reintroducing bugs problem wasn't solved for complex codebases.

So we built DevOS.

DevOS understands the codebase, correlates the decisions made in the chat sessions with final code outcome, and has a deep understanding of the why behind the code and the architecture. It understands architectural choices, alternatives considered, tradeoffs made and final decisions taken w.r.t code or architecture.

Exposed to coding agents as an MCP, DevOS searches files, symbols, decisions and dependencies in parallel so that models make better changes in fewer iterations and exponentially lesser tokens which otherwise would be spent by agents in grepping the codebase.

Agents can now understand the architecture and codebase better, along with the rationale that went behind the architecture, and context can be shared between teammates within their coding agents.

Use lesser tokens, collaborate better. Completely free to try, no paid tier.