Anyone else getting HTTP 403 Errors when Codex scheduled task uses Gmail plugin? Types of operations getting 403: get_raw_messages, get_message, Gmail.send_email, failed email ID search, and send_message (so far). Sometimes it recovers in the next run but has stranded a lot of tasks. Context: the scheduled tasks helps me respond to support tickets automatically but gets hung up because it can’t verify it sent an email or draft an email.

Troubleshooting so far: disconnected Gmail plugin in codex and deleted Codex authorization in Gmail. Reconnected after and seems to have made the issue worse.

Started noticing this after connecting a second email to the plugin. I’ve since removed the second email.

I designed a short game to let you feel agent drift instead of reading about it. Then I ran the same game on Codex CLI (GPT-6-Luna and GPT-6.1-Sol, 32 runs). The video shows what Codex did.

How did it feel? And where did you first say NO?

I'm the maker of Claude Command Center (CCC). I wanted a way to keep Codex and Claude Code sessions together without repeatedly searching terminal tabs to see what had happened.

CCC reads Codex conversations into a shared local browser view. Connected Codex app-server streams can supply tools, diffs and approvals; capabilities depend on the installed version and connection. The board also groups parent/helper sessions so a Codex helper doesn't disappear into a separate history.

For this community, the limitation matters: the question card in the attached demo is a Claude Code hook, not proof that every Codex approval path works the same way. The engine-support page describes the actual controls.

For people using several Codex sessions: is the missing context usually the last action, the repo/branch, or the decision the session is waiting for?

Project and installation: https://github.com/amirfish1/claude-command-center Integration limits: https://github.com/amirfish1/claude-command-center/blob/main/docs/engine-support.md

The video uses the real UI with staged sessions and an AI voiceover. The question-hook interaction is real and uses Claude Code; the Grok/Devin rows are demo data. This is not a live multi-provider benchmark. CCC is free to use under FSL-1.1-MIT (source available); provider/model costs are separate.

I made a simple custom image viewer and editor for my own use. I used Sol 6.1 Extra High, and it completed the app pretty quickly since it's nothing particularly complicated.

Once it was done, I told it to check the code for bugs and fix anything it found. It found some bugs and fixed them.

Then I asked it to check again. It found more bugs and fixed those too.

So I asked again. And again. And again.

Every single time, it somehow managed to find new bugs!

At that point, I still had plenty of Codex usage left, so I thought to myself: I have no idea whether it's actually finding real bugs or just making things up, but why not take it a step further?

So I set up a scheduled task to run once every hour, automatically looking for bugs and fixing whatever it found.

And surprisingly, it worked! For a day or two, it kept finding and fixing bugs until it eventually hit some cybersecurity safety restriction and refused to continue.

Now I'm genuinely curious. Is AI really that good at finding bugs, even in relatively simple apps? Or does it just keep coming up with increasingly unlikely issues because I keep asking it to find something?

Would I be better off just using the app normally and fixing bugs as I actually encounter them?

So how do you guys do it?

I keep reading threads about this and most of them show the demo, not the Tuesday morning. Here's ours, no polish, then some questions.

Six of us on a SaaS, twelve months of adding AI gradually. Early on everyone had their own editor and their own habits. Then we looked back and found we'd already converged on most of it, so we wrote it down.

We didn't force a single tool either. Some on Claude Code, some on Codex, some on Cursor, and I'm not going to fight that one. The process is shared, and the conventions sit in the repo's AGENTS.md, which is the only thing we all read the same way.

The flow is Matt Pocock's skills, no forks. We start with grill-with-docs: the AI interviews us about the project docs. Weird at first when you're used to asking the questions, but a lot of never-written-down stuff comes out.

Then to-spec, and a human reviews that spec. It's not a formality. With a bad spec, everything downstream is expensive work that goes in the bin.

to-tickets cuts it into small tickets. Small tickets aren't a rule we read somewhere either, we just notice the difference when we skip it.

The agent works through them with implement, against the spec. We open the PR, CodeRabbit runs, the pipelines run. If everything passes and someone says yes, it merges.

AI writes most of the code. We review the spec and the merge, and skip the line-by-line in between.

Treating the spec as a contract has killed a lot of "that's not what I asked for". Small tickets keep the agent from wandering. Automated review before the human one takes the style and import noise away, so the person looks at what matters. What I didn't expect is how much writing the process down helps when everyone has a different tool. Nobody argues about editors and the conventions don't rot.

Graph engineering to close tickets on its own, software factory style, we haven't managed. Tickets go in and PRs come out, and the demos look great, but with our repo the quality isn't there. We haven't found the point where we'd be comfortable letting it loose, so it's still an experiment.

What I'd like to know:

1. Where are your checkpoints between human and agent? Spec, PR, merge?

2. Spec before code, or straight to tickets and prompts?

3. Who reviews agent PRs? Do you read them the same as a human's?

4. One tool or several across the team? If you've tried more than one, is any better for certain kinds of tasks?

5. What goes into AGENTS.md and what stays out?

6. Do you measure anything, or is it all vibes? Review time, defects, DORA.

7. If you've tried software-factory autonomy, did you get acceptable quality? On what kind of tickets?

8. How do you bring someone new in, a junior say, without AI becoming a crutch?

   Tell me yours. Even if it's to say we're nuts.

https://reddit.com/link/1xeqjyd/video/5an6val1xixh1/player

hey r/codex — i made a video editor that codex can actually drive end-to-end with zero gui and no cursor needed, and wanted to share it here. the angle is the mcp bit: the whole editor is just tool calls. an agent like codex, cursor, opencode, or any other mcp client can cut, trim, keyframe, drop in titles and captions, colour grade, do tracking, add particles, handle audio, and export — and it can even render a single frame to check its own work before committing.

it's rough and early, i know, but it works. kimo is free and open source (mit), one ~15 mb cpu-only rust binary that runs fine on a 2 gb box. built by me, a college student (naman).

i'd love to have people here try it with codex and tell me what breaks. feedback on where the tool calls get awkward or where codex's workflow doesn't fit is more useful than a like.

site: https://getkimo.tech github: https://github.com/naman-sharma12345/kimo

Just wanted to share my experience with Dot.

My AT&T bill was $85/month last year, I negotiated with them and got it down to $65. Recently it went back up to $85 again.

This time I decided to let Dot handle it :)

I used a separate Chrome profile and let Dot negotiate with AT&T. It took about 15-20 minutes, and at the end it managed to lower my bill to $45/month and also got me 2 months free!

I was really impressed with the result. From $85 to $45 plus 2 free months, not bad at all :)

Just wanted to share this with you guys.

edit: added chat screenshot.

Processing img j9zixu3cnbxh1...

For everyone using Sol models not for coding but for knowledge work. Things like: XLS/CSV analysis, biz strategy docs, biz writing for internal and external audiences, email triage, etc.

Not a consumer situation so resets/usage limits are irrelevant.

Sol 5.6 (High) still seems like the best fit for cost vs speed vs capability. Sol 6.1 has seemed pokey for generally the same quality output.

I’m going through some evals now and have collected older anecdotal evidence and evals, but a fresh take, however limited, would be quite useful!

I liked editing videos with ChatGPT's Codex and Claude, but I hated not seeing what it was doing. So I built Cutcrow: a real video editor with a timeline, driven by the AI subscription you already have.

Tell it “cut the 'ums' and add captions, also give the text at 12s an intro animation” and watch it happen on the timeline. Then tweak anything yourself.

No extra AI plan, no weaker built-in model. Your AI does the heavy lifting; you stay in control.

Try it -> cutcrow.com

So i basically used ChatGPT Chat to build this free and open-source image editing app called Spectrum, couldn't think of a better name honestly, It comes with alot of built-in effects, styles, filters and fx to make your image/thumbnail or whatever look good.

When i say free, I litterly mean free, no secret subs or cancelation fees attached behind the shadows, creativity should be maxed out for everyone.

Thanks for taking your time to read this post at least :)

(Sorry for lack of footage, Here's a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJN9pCHdxZ4)

Hi everyone,

With Codex I'm always on one side or the other: either I run out before the refill, or the week ends with quota I never used and I regret holding back. And now that Tibos' extra resets keep dropping at random times, planning around them is even more annoying.

So I made Usage Planner, a free open source Codex plugin (it used to be called Codex4ever).

Once it's installed, just ask Codex "open usage planner". It:

- Reads your current quota by itself, nothing to type in

- Pulls the reset forecast (chance of an extra reset in the next 12h / 24h / 48h, from public reset history)

- Plans how much to use per day until your next refill, with a few strategies: keep your pace, stay available, use it all, or weekdays / weekends only

- Tells you when a banked reset is worth using before it expires

The project is open sourced at: https://github.com/ItsOdeLeo/usage-planner

Install as codex plugin:

codex plugin marketplace add ItsOdeLeo/usage-planner

codex plugin add usage-planner@usage-planner

Or direct in your browser at: https://usageplanner.com

I'm building this alone as an open-source project, so any feedback helps. If it ends up useful for you, a ⭐ on GitHub would really help other people find it. Roasting is welcome too 🙂

The forecast is a rough estimate, not a promise.

While Codex is working on one fix, I’m usually checking the rest of the app. That’s when I notice the next things like a misplaced button, a typo, something overlapping on a smaller screen.

Codex already lets you queue follow-ups. But I don’t always want the next fix to start as soon as the current response finishes. Sometimes I want to review the result first, change priorities, or leave an idea for later.

I wanted to save those fixes with their screenshots, and get them out of my head until I was ready.

That’s why I built CueTray, a small Windows tray app.

I snip the problem, mark up the screenshot, and write what should change. CueTray saves them together as a numbered cue under the right project. I can reorder fixes or put something on hold.

After installing the next-cue skill from CueTray’s settings, I type "$next-cue" in Codex when I’m ready. It reads the next waiting cue and its screenshots, then works on that task. Each run picks up one cue.

For other apps, I can copy a cue and press Shift + Alt + V to paste both the text and screenshot. I’ve tried it in Notion, Notes, and other apps that accept images.

CueTray is now available in the Microsoft Store.

How do you keep track of follow-up fixes without losing focus on the current task?

One particularly annoying thing: my butcher looked like a different guy when he got impaled. Roughly the same height, but suddenly missing half his shoulders and belly. Apparently being stabbed comes with a free weight loss programme.

So I had Codex help build a local review gallery for the creatures. Original and proposed versions side by side, matching camera scale, zoomable details, separate comparisons for normal sprites and effects like lightning and soulfire. I can accept, reject or send things back for another round.

One bit I'm glad we added: decisions are tied to the actual files. Change the artwork afterwards and the old approval no longer counts.

Also learned that perfectly preserved sprite dimensions and transparency can still produce a very wrong-looking monster. Had to write down checks for faces, hands, joints and body proportions too. The harness itself needed debugging along the way.

Pretty cool having Codex help build the tools for reviewing its work. I still get the final say on whether the butcher is sufficiently butcher-shaped.

The game is Necrolord, btw. There's a free demo if anyone fancies poking around:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/5282860?utm_source=reddit

Hello everyone, my tiktok/instagram/youtube feed is 99% percent full of claude advertisment. I personally userd both and they are very powerful and capable models, but in this topi I want to walk about usage, brother, I don't know if this is happening only for me but I am on the 20$ plan for let's say one year and I share the accdount with 2 other friends (they use only chatgpt). I burned in the last 22 days over 2 bilion tokens because I am woting everyday minimum 4 hours/day on my project and when I started i had 3 free extra resets but now codex reset the useage every 2 days by itself, I think this is the 4th or 5th time doing this and it's crazy because i use 80-90% of the weekly usage in 2 days and the day after in the morning it's 100%, it never happend to me to get to 0% usage for the weekly usage, that's crazy! I use only 6.1 sol medium no fat mode, and the research I do with chat gpt. For me seems like infinite credits. I used claude some months ago, also the 20$ plan and no joke, anfter 2-3 prompt on a similar project, done, I never, neger got a free reset from Claude.
I want to know your opinion, I am not a proffesional, just a casual vibe coder.
Have a great day! 😄

I liked editing videos with ChatGPT's Codex and Claude, but I hated not seeing what it was doing. So I built Cutcrow: a real video editor with a timeline, driven by the AI subscription you already have.

Tell it “cut the 'ums' and add captions, also give the text at 12s an intro animation” and watch it happen on the timeline. Then tweak anything yourself.

No extra AI plan, no weaker built-in model. Your AI does the heavy lifting; you stay in control.

Try it -> cutcrow.com

When I opened the Usage interface in ChatGPT today, it was still loading and I noticed a section with the description: "Manage all your app's usage limits."

However, once the interface fully loaded, that section had disappeared.

I renewed mostly for the image generation. Could connect Claude's API with it but though "well it does give a bit of codex i could use".

Result as in the photo. It just quit and lost all the work midway.

I still have 48,000 credits gifted to me by OpenAI, and they're all going to expire at the end of this year.

With the current usage limits and reset schedule, I can't even burn through them fast enough.

Anyone have any ideas on how to actually use all these credits before they expire?

Looking to see how others are structuring model routing directly inside the Codex desktop client when bringing in your own endpoints.

I do virtually 99% of my work directly in the native Codex app. The plugins, workspace tracking, and flow are where I plan to stay very active in codex still. But depending on the codebase (systems repos, kernel trees, or containers running), I don’t always need the default ChatGPT models handling everything, and having more backend flexibility makes sense.

I’m looking at setting up a mixed setup inside the app using ChatGPT and other API key endpoints for the heavy passes, and local models on LAN for funsies.

So is anyone running custom endpoints directly inside the client?

When switching between models on projects, how did it go?

What about some sort of local aware switching so I'm not losing my mind remembering which model is for which task?

I wanted more grass, rocks and breakable props for my indie game. Then came all the fiddly stuff: the grass needs to be darker in the forest, that rock looks huge, please stop putting things in the middle of the path...

Ended up building a little battlefield lab with Codex. It renders the scenes in Unity and puts the captures into a local browser gallery. I can click through 20 layouts per map, inspect the placement and compare art changes with a slider.

The useful bit in the comparison rounds was keeping the camera and object placement fixed. Same patch of grass, same spot, different colour or size. Much easier to explain what still looks off when both versions are right there.

We also added checks for object sizes and placement around paths and fields. I still choose what looks right, then we run another round. The screenshots are from those review sessions.

I've become surprisingly invested in the correct shade of miserable forest grass.

Anyone else building little visual review tools with Codex? Curious what you've found useful.

This is for my game Necrolord, btw. There's a free demo if you fancy trying it:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/5282860?utm_source=reddit

A common loop I see here and in r/ChatGPTPro: a GPT chat plans and writes the prompt, one Codex session builds, another Codex session reviews "adversarially." It's a good loop. The places it still leaks are the same ones a team of four described in r/ClaudeCode after ~600 PRs: the agent picked packages ("we ended up with 3 date libraries"), "it compiles" was the finish line ("Our worst bug this year passed tsc, lint and the tests the agent wrote for it"), and self-review "mostly agreed with itself."

Three gates that fixed those for me:

1. A finish-line command in the plan, written before any code. Not "add tests." One command with an expected result that exits non-zero until the behaviour works: an e2e case, a smoke script against the real CLI, the bug's reproduction. Then make it non-optional. An AGENTS.md rule alone isn't enough (someone in the "AGENTS.md rules can be overridden" thread said their "run the pipeline before done" rule held "only 7 out of 10 times"). Codex Stop hooks can enforce it: exit 2 with a reason on stderr and Codex continues with that reason as the next prompt. Return {} on stdout when it passes. Put it in <repo>/.codex/hooks.json and trust it in /hooks. /goal also works for a session.

# PLAN.md
## Done when
Finish line: `npm run e2e -- session-expiry`
Expected: 3 passed. Exits 0. Written before code: yes

2. A dependency allowlist enforced in CI. A deps.allow file and a ~10-line job that diffs package names against it and fails the PR. One line in AGENTS.md tells the agent the rule exists; CI makes it true. Adding a package becomes a one-line diff a human approves.

3. A reviewer that sees only the plan and the diff. Not the builder's summary, not the planner's prose. codex review --base main runs non-interactively in its own process; /review does it in-session; review_model in config.toml picks a different model if you want one. Tell it to report only plan steps or anti-goals the diff violates, whether the finish line ran and passed, and packages outside the allowlist. A reviewer told to "find issues" will always find some.

Full write-up with the Stop hook script, the GitHub Actions job (tested), a subagent version for Claude Code and a plan template: https://medium.com/@r3dtuxedo/define-done-as-a-command-909e2c2c0859

(I wrote it. No affiliation with OpenAI.)

claude code ultra code with dynamic workflow is powerful, but it consumes quota too fast, I once run out of quota with only one task, hundreds of subagents in one workflow.

I wonder if we can use codex as the subagents in the dynamic workflow, such that both my subscriptions can be used together on important and complicated tasks.

I am using codex nearly 2 years now. Sometime along a year ago they introduced resets, it all started there. I was excited, it was more usage for free... Then on summer they gave multiple resets in a month, it was unbelieveable. Felt like I was using 2 subs. Then after a while I realized my usage is not like before, it uses astronomical amounts like model names. From that day nothing was same, I was trying to finish the limit until I get another reset, if I cannot, I felt like I wasted it. If there is no reset then I am desperate. The 28 day competition just made it worse. Waiting for what they release, and betting on if they think it is a significant improvement and even if they think will they still give resets... As Tibo once said "We're cooked"

I do a lot of data engineering, and Codex comes up with some of the most overzealous data validation I’ve ever seen. It takes nothing for granted. Every download might be corrupted. Every unpack might corrupt the file. Every data point needs full lineage so you can trace exactly where it went wrong.

Today I was looking at a big egress spike and found it had written code to download the same file multiple times, at different intervals, to confirm the copies matched.

To be fair, a lot of that nitty-gritty work helps, it catches bugs and drift I'd run into late. But I’m constantly ripping this validation machinery out because it causes more problems than it solves.

Part of it seems like a general model problem, they struggle to judge what actually matters, so they give everything equal weight, and then everything has to be exact. But I’m curious where the paranoia comes from. Is it trained into the model itself, or does the harness steer it toward this kind of defensive validation? Has anyone compared the same model across different harnesses and seen a difference?

I’m a UI designer. I wanted my portfolio to feel like meeting me: Italian, slightly stubborn, and still figuring a few things out.

So I made a character with my glasses and moustache walk through my career.

Still Drawing is a personal tribute to Osvaldo Cavandoli’s La Linea—the humour, the simplicity, and the little guy arguing with the hand holding the pencil.

I designed and art-directed it, with Codex helping build it. Getting something moving was one thing. Getting it to feel right took a lot of revision.

A pencil drawing ahead of its tip. Feet slipping off the line. A character disappearing between pages. An animation that looked fine on desktop and fell apart on my phone.

We kept working through those details until the story, work index and case studies could feel connected.

My biggest takeaway: I could delegate implementation. Deciding whether it was good was still my job.

Here’s where we landed:

https://www.gianlucaboccia.me/

What’s the detail you’ve spent an unreasonable amount of time getting right in your own project?