| name | codex-review |
| description | Review local changes before a trunk commit or push. Use when the user asks for review, a final preflight pass, or a regression check focused on correctness, risks, and missing tests. |
Codex Review
Use a code-review mindset. Findings come first.
Focus
- Behavioral regressions
- Incorrect assumptions in changed code
- Missing or weak verification
- Risky git or release steps
Workflow
- Inspect the diff, not just final files.
- Trace the changed behavior to the user-facing or system-facing boundary.
- Check that the relevant tests or validation steps exist and were run.
- Classify each accepted finding as
event-model gap, domain/core gap, or
shell/CLI gap.
- If a finding is an
event-model gap, patch the event model first, rerun the
model completeness pass, and only then implement the fix.
- For stateful CLIs or operator tooling, explicitly inspect open-vs-create
behavior, bootstrap/init safety, wrong-path or wrong-store behavior, and
lifecycle-state interactions.
- Report findings ordered by severity with file references when possible.
- If no findings exist, say so explicitly and mention residual risk or test gaps.
Biases
- Prefer concrete evidence over hypothetical style commentary.
- Do not center PR review conventions. This is local preflight review for trunk shipping.
