codex-review
OpenAI Codex CLI code review with GPT-5.2-Codex, CI/CD integration
38
37%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/codex-review/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
32%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
The description is a terse noun-phrase list that names the tool ecosystem but fails to describe concrete actions or provide any 'Use when...' guidance. It reads more like a feature tag line than a functional skill description, making it difficult for Claude to reliably select this skill at the right time.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger scenarios, e.g., 'Use when the user asks for automated code review via OpenAI Codex CLI, or wants to integrate GPT-based code review into a CI/CD pipeline.'
List specific concrete actions such as 'Reviews pull requests, identifies bugs, suggests refactors, generates review comments, and configures CI/CD pipeline hooks for automated review.'
Include natural user-facing trigger terms like 'pull request', 'PR review', 'code quality check', 'automated review', and 'pipeline integration' to improve keyword coverage.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (code review) and mentions specific tools (OpenAI Codex CLI, GPT-5.2-Codex, CI/CD integration), but doesn't list concrete actions like 'analyze pull requests', 'suggest fixes', or 'check code quality'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Provides a partial 'what' (code review with specific tools) but completely lacks a 'when' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when...' caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' itself is also weak, warranting a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant keywords like 'code review', 'CI/CD', 'Codex CLI', and 'GPT-5.2-Codex', but misses common user-facing terms like 'pull request', 'PR review', 'code quality', 'lint', or 'static analysis'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The mention of specific tools (OpenAI Codex CLI, GPT-5.2-Codex) provides some distinctiveness, but 'code review' and 'CI/CD integration' are broad enough to overlap with other code review or CI/CD skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
42%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill is highly actionable with excellent, executable code examples across multiple CI/CD platforms, but it is severely bloated — it reads more like comprehensive product documentation than a focused skill file. It lacks progressive disclosure (everything is inlined with no supporting bundle files) and includes substantial content Claude doesn't need (installation basics, marketing tables, shell completions). Workflow clarity is decent but missing validation/error-recovery steps for CI/CD operations.
Suggestions
Reduce the SKILL.md to a concise overview (~80-100 lines) covering headless review, structured output schema, and one CI example, then split GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, Jenkins, and configuration into separate bundle files with clear references.
Remove content Claude already knows: Node.js installation, npm basics, shell completion setup, and the 'Why Codex' marketing table.
Add validation checkpoints to CI/CD workflows: check codex exit code, validate JSON output against schema before posting, and include error handling for API failures.
Move the JSON review schema into a referenced file (e.g., `review-schema.json`) rather than inlining it, and reference it from the SKILL.md.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at ~350+ lines. Explains installation steps Claude already knows (brew, nvm, npm), includes shell completion setup, full Jenkins/GitLab pipeline configs, a comparison table with Claude itself, and extensive troubleshooting. Much of this is reference documentation that could be linked rather than inlined. The 'Why Codex for Code Review?' table and marketing-style content wastes tokens. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste ready code throughout: bash commands, YAML CI configs, JSON schemas, TOML configs, and Groovy pipelines. Every section contains concrete, runnable examples with specific flags and options. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | CI/CD workflows are clearly sequenced (checkout → install → review → post comment), and the structured output section shows a clear schema-then-execute flow. However, there are no validation checkpoints or error recovery steps — e.g., what happens if codex exec fails in CI, how to verify the review output is valid, or feedback loops for handling rate limits or timeouts mid-pipeline. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Monolithic wall of content with no references to external files despite the content clearly warranting separation (CI/CD configs for GitHub/GitLab/Jenkins could each be separate files, JSON schema could be a referenced file, configuration examples could be split out). Everything is inlined in one massive document with no bundle files to support it. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (511 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- alinaqi/claude-bootstrap
- Commit
65efb33
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.