CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

codex-review

Run an independent code review using the OpenAI Codex CLI in headless mode. Gets a second opinion from a different model family (the current Codex models) on recent changes, a PR, a commit, or the whole app — covering bugs, regressions, security, data consistency, UX/state bugs, performance risks, and testing gaps. Saves a severity-prioritised report to .jez/reviews/. Triggers: 'codex review', 'review with codex', 'independent code review', 'what does codex think', 'get codex to review'.

72

Quality

89%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A highly actionable, well-sequenced skill body with executable commands and preflight validation. The main weakness is progressive disclosure: the body externalizes its canonical review prompt to a `prompt.md` that is not present in the bundle.

Suggestions

Ship `prompt.md` alongside SKILL.md — the body's core instruction depends on it, and its absence breaks navigation to the canonical review prompt.

Tighten the rationale prose in the intro ('Codex catches things Claude misses due to author bias', 'Complements brains-trust') to push conciseness toward the top anchor.

Add an explicit validate→fix→retry checkpoint after the `codex review` run (e.g. detect an empty/failed report and re-run) to raise workflow clarity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient with concrete commands and no padding about basic concepts, but a few explanatory sentences ('Codex catches things Claude misses due to author bias', 'Complements brains-trust') are mild over-explanation that could be trimmed. Not a 5 because not every prose token earns its place; not a 3 because the bulk is tight and actionable.

4 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable, copy-paste-ready bash for preflight (`which codex`), output setup (mkdir, timestamp, tee), and the `codex review` invocation across all scope variants (uncommitted, --base, --commit, HEAD) — covering the common cases completely.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear numbered sequence (Preflight → scope → run → summarise → verify) with preflight validation that halts on missing binary/auth, plus a self-test Verification checklist. Not a 5: there is no mid-process validate→fix→retry feedback loop, and the Verification section is a post-hoc checklist rather than an embedded checkpoint.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organised and the one reference is clearly signaled at one level deep ('The canonical review prompt lives in `prompt.md` next to this skill'), but that referenced `prompt.md` is absent from the bundle — the actual bundle structure breaks navigation to the core prompt content.

3 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong, well-rounded description: third-person voice, concrete actions, explicit trigger guidance, and a distinct niche. Every dimension lands at the top anchor with no verbosity or over-claiming.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'Run an independent code review using the OpenAI Codex CLI in headless mode', covering 'bugs, regressions, security, data consistency, UX/state bugs, performance risks, and testing gaps', and 'Saves a severity-prioritised report to .jez/reviews/' — giving comprehensive coverage of what the skill does.

5 / 5

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (run independent Codex CLI review, second opinion, save severity-prioritised report) and 'when' via the explicit Triggers clause with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The explicit 'Triggers:' clause enumerates natural phrases a user would say — 'codex review', 'review with codex', 'independent code review', 'what does codex think', 'get codex to review' — covering synonyms and the CLI command name.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'OpenAI Codex CLI' / 'different model family' framing carves a clear niche with distinctive triggers (codex review) and minimal overlap risk with generic review skills.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
jezweb/claude-skills
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.