Nice. 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.
Re:Ghostling
by hombre_fatal on Sunday March 22, 2026 @06:15PM
(#47482794)
Man, 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.
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.