Menu
Send staged changes to Codex for independent peer review, then evaluate and implement warranted feedback
Instalar com Codex ou Claude Copie este prompt, cole no Codex, Claude ou outro assistente e deixe que ele revise a página da skill e instale para você.
Baseado na classificação ocupacional SOC
Run two heterogeneous fresh-context Herdr reviewers against both code quality and a governing plan, then synthesize evidence-backed feedback. Use when the user asks for a dual or adversarial review, code-versus-plan verification, or independent Claude and Pi reviewers before deciding whether a PR needs changes.
Control herdr from Codex. Use when the user says "use Herder" or asks to inspect, focus, prompt, spawn, or manage herdr workspaces, tabs, panes, or agents from a Codex session, without deciding whether they are inside or outside herdr.
Use when the user explicitly asks Codex Desktop or another shell outside Herdr to create, inspect, prompt, follow up with, or monitor Herdr agent tabs, or when the `codex-herdr` router skill hands off external control.
Fan out a user-provided task list into one reviewed PR per task through Herdr, then shepherd the PR fleet through CI and review without merging. Use when the user asks to fan out PRs, parallelize backlog items into separate PRs, or autonomously drive multiple agent-owned PRs to green.
Inspect and import content into my self-hosted AutoCaliWeb library. Use for catalog status, search, recent imports, shelves, metadata, or importing an ebook, comic, PDF, or audiobook.
Correct-by-construction TypeScript standards. Use for TypeScript engineering or when another skill needs the user's coding standards.
| name | codex-review |
| description | Send staged changes to Codex for independent peer review, then evaluate and implement warranted feedback |
| allowed-tools | Bash(git diff:*), Bash(git status:*), Bash(git log:*), Task(codex) |
Use the codex subagent to review staged changes. Pass it the following prompt:
Review the staged git diff as a senior engineer. Provide:
- Critical Issues - bugs, security vulnerabilities, or breaking changes that MUST be fixed.
- Improvements - concrete suggestions for better code quality, performance, or maintainability.
- Nitpicks - minor style or preference items (low priority).
Be specific. Reference exact file paths and lines from the diff. Provide code examples for suggested fixes. Do NOT comment on formatting or whitespace. Do NOT suggest adding comments or docblocks unless something is genuinely confusing. Keep your review concise and actionable.
Display Codex's full review to the user in a clear, formatted way.
Read the staged diff yourself (git diff --cached) so you have full context,
then evaluate each piece of Codex's feedback:
After making changes, re-stage the modified files.
