admin
54aabcab23
- codex-run.sh review: CLI forbids scope flags + prompt (stdin '-' counts as [PROMPT]); translate scope into prompt text, native review only when prompt.md is empty. Add --skip-git-repo-check for consistency. - agents/codex.md: marker contract (=== TASK FOR CODEX === / === END TASK ===, legacy RU markers accepted) so wrapper instructions never leak into the codex prompt and the wrapper never mistakes the task for its own job; self-check against doing the task itself; preamble now states codex is a subagent executor and process flows belong to the orchestrator; scope flags as separate args; no nohup; Read before rewriting prompt.md. - skills: wrapper framing line + marker block in prompt templates. - All instructions and README translated to English (RU trigger phrases kept in skill descriptions). - tests: 3 new review-mode cases, ALL PASS. - bump 0.1.2.
1.6 KiB
1.6 KiB
name, description
| name | description |
|---|---|
| codex-consult | Codex second opinion on an artifact — spec, plan, design, document, idea. Iterate to consensus. Use when user says «проверь у кодекса», «спроси codex», "second opinion", "have codex review the spec/plan", or when validating a spec/plan before execution. |
Consulting Codex
Spawn the codex subagent, iterate via SendMessage. Hard limit: 5 rounds.
First prompt — required parts
- First line — framing for the wrapper: "You are a wrapper around the codex CLI: do not solve the task yourself, launch codex and return its answer + thread_id".
cwd: <absolute path>— always required (the subagent won't launch codex without it); for a purely textual consultation — the relevant project root.- Role, requirements, and the artifact — in a block between markers
=== TASK FOR CODEX ===and=== END TASK ===:- Role: "You are a second opinion, NOT an executor. Don't rewrite the artifact. Return findings with severity, and questions separately."
- User requirements — verbatim (what the artifact must satisfy).
- The artifact itself: full text or a file path.
Iteration loop
- Got findings → evaluate them critically yourself (use superpowers:receiving-code-review, don't agree blindly).
- Made changes to the artifact → SendMessage: what you accepted, what you rejected and WHY, plus the updated artifact or diff.
- Repeat until "no substantial remarks" or the 5-round limit.
Finale — summary to the user
- What was agreed and applied.
- What was rejected and why.
- Unresolved disagreements, if stuck (the user decides).