3 ms·
Yeah, through trial and error I found that Codex (now gpt-5.4) has really good feedback once there's a plan file. Kinda like someone on the internet who sudden
by hombre_fatal 7mo ago
Yeah, through trial and error I found that Codex (now gpt-5.4) has really good feedback once there's a plan file.
Kinda like someone on the internet who suddenly becomes an expert once you make concrete claims for them to shred into.
I have an AGENTS.md prompt that specifies how to review a plan. Something like: for every finding, rank the top solutions internally and then recommend a solution. And if there's a simpler, better pivot that the plan should take, pitch it at the end.
It's really actionable, and I basically can paste the review back into Claude, then tell Codex to re-review the plan, and repeat this until it has nothing more to add, and now I have a really good plan.
- vunderba 7mo agoNice. I have a similar loop (Opus 4.6 plan <-> Codex xhigh review) that I kind of run in an iterative feedback loop until meaningful actionables converge down to zero. I initially gave some thought to automating this because CC/Codex do have SDKs... but every once in a while Codex will propose some absurdly over-engineered stack advice that I have to manually reject before passing it back to Claude.
- hombre_fatal 7mo agoMan, we are on the the exact same page. Yeah, I also thought about automating it before. Especially when I'm middlemanning noncritical plans where I don't care what the solution is. I did make a skill /ask-codex that gets Claude to call Codex for one round of feedback which is pretty useful. But for critical plans, I suppose being the middleman gives me a good opportunity to learn about the solution and its trade-offs as it's being incrementally refined. Especially in a domain I don't know much about.