Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

codex-code-reviewer(Codex 代码 reviewer)

codex-code-reviewer 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

codex-code-reviewer 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为调用外部服务;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 69,087。

总安装 220周安装 9GitHub Stars 115下载 71核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:codex-code-reviewer(Codex 代码 reviewer)
来源仓库:https://github.com/vcnoc/claude-code-zen-mcp-skill-work
仓库路径:skills/codex-code-reviewer
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/vcnoc/claude-code-zen-mcp-skill-work --skill codex-code-reviewer
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/vcnoc/claude-code-zen-mcp-skill-work --skill codex-code-reviewer

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

codex-code-reviewer 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。它提供系统化迭代式代码审查流程,自动检测最近修改文件是否符合项目标准。

支持交互式审批与全自动修复两种模式,最多迭代五次直至质量标准达成。安装命令为 npx skills add https://github.com/vcnoc/claude-code-zen-mcp-skill-work --skill codex-code-reviewer,需配合 zen mcp 工具使用。

使用前建议核实 CLAUDE.md 要求定义清晰及最大迭代次数限制。

来源仓库内路径:skills/codex-code-reviewer

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/vcnoc/claude-code-zen-mcp-skill-work --skill c…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要调用外部服务,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

codex-code-reviewer 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/vcnoc/claude-code-zen-mcp-skill-work --skill codex-code-…。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

codex-code-reviewer 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

codex-code-reviewer 需要什么权限?

权限级别是调用外部服务。该 Skill 可能调用第三方服务、云服务或外部模型 API,使用前需要确认账号、额度、数据发送范围和服务条款。

codex-code-reviewer 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

codex-code-reviewer 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 220 次,近一周安装 9 次,下载 71 次,GitHub 115 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

codex-code-reviewer 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
codex-code-reviewer

Codex 代码 reviewer · 本页

220115调用外部服务未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Codex Code Reviewer

Overview

This skill provides a systematic, iterative code review workflow powered by zen mcp's codex tool. It automatically checks recently modified code files against project standards (CLAUDE.md requirements), presents identified issues to users for approval, applies fixes, and re-validates until code quality standards are met or the maximum iteration limit is reached.

Operation Modes:

  • Interactive Mode (Default): Present issues to user, wait for approval before applying fixes
  • Full Automation Mode: Automatically select and apply all suggested fixes without user approval (activated when user initially requests "full automation" or "complete automation")

When to Use This Skill

Trigger this skill when the user says:

  • "Use codex to check the code"
  • "Please help me check if the recently generated code has any issues"
  • "Check the code after each generation"
  • Similar requests for code quality validation using codex

Workflow: Iterative Code Review Cycle

Prerequisites

Before starting the review cycle:

  1. Read Operation Mode from Context (automation_mode - READ FROM SSOT):

- automation_mode definition and constraints: See CLAUDE.md「📚 共享概念速查」 - This skill's role: Skill Layer (read-only), read from context [AUTOMATION_MODE: true/false], true → auto-fix / false → ask user

1a. Read Coverage Target from Context (coverage_target - READ FROM SSOT):

  • coverage_target definition and constraints: See CLAUDE.md「📚 共享概念速查」
  • This skill's role: Skill Layer (read-only), read from context [COVERAGE_TARGET: X%], validate coverage (≥ target pass, < 70% reject)
  1. Identify Files to Review:

- Use git status or similar to identify recently modified files - Interactive Mode (automation_mode = false): Confirm with user which files should be reviewed - Automated Mode (automation_mode = true): Auto-select all recently modified files, log decision to auto_log.md

  1. Initialize iteration counter: current_iteration = 1
  2. Set maximum iterations: max_iterations = 5
  3. Initialize review tool tracker: first_review_done = false
  4. Detect Review Context:

- Check if this is final quality validation (project completion/final verification) - If YES: Enable Final Validation Mode (requires minimum 2 passes: codereview + clink) - If NO: Use Standard Review Mode

Review Cycle Loop

Execute the following loop until termination conditions are met:

Step 1: Select and Invoke Appropriate Review Tool

Tool Selection Logic:

if current_iteration == 1 and not first_review_done:
    # First review: Use mcp__zen__codereview
    review_tool = "mcp__zen__codereview"
    first_review_done = True
else:
    # Second and subsequent reviews: Use mcp__zen__clink with codex CLI
    review_tool = "mcp__zen__clink"

A) First Review: Call mcp__zen__codereview

Tool: mcp__zen__codereview
Parameters:
- step: Detailed review request (e.g., "Review the following files for code quality, security, performance, and adherence to project standards...")
- step_number: current_iteration
- total_steps: Estimate based on findings (start with 2-3)
- next_step_required: true (initially)
- findings: Document all discovered issues
- relevant_files: [list of recently modified file paths - MUST be absolute full paths]
- review_type: "full" (covers quality, security, performance, architecture)
- model: "codex" (or user-specified model)
- review_validation_type: "external" (for expert validation)
- confidence: Start with "exploring", increase as understanding grows

Important: Use absolute full paths; follow zen mcp's codereview workflow (2-3 steps); reference references/quality_standards/README.md (on-demand loading)

B) Second and Subsequent Reviews: Call mcp__zen__clink with codex CLI

Tool: mcp__zen__clink
Parameters:
- prompt: "Review files for: 1) Code quality 2) Security 3) Performance 4) Architecture 5) Documentation. Categorize by severity (critical/high/medium/low), provide file:line locations and fix recommendations."
- cli_name: "codex"
- role: "code_reviewer"
- files: [absolute full paths]
- continuation_id: [optional, for context continuity]

Important: Use absolute full paths for files; use continuation_id for context continuity; supported params: prompt, cli_name, role, files, images, continuation_id

Step 2: Present Findings and Decision Making

After codex returns the review results:

  1. Summarize Issues Clearly:

- Group by severity (critical/high/medium/low) - Provide specific file locations and line numbers - Explain the impact of each issue

  1. Decision Making Based on automation_mode (READ FROM CONTEXT):

- automation_mode behavior and decision logic: See CLAUDE.md「📚 共享概念速查」and「G11 Automated Repair Skills」 - [AUTOMATION_MODE: false] → Interactive: Ask user approval - [AUTOMATION_MODE: true] → Automated: Auto-fix Critical/High, conditional Medium, auto-fix Low style issues - Output [Automated Decision Record] fragments for auto_log.md (collected by router, generated by simple-gemini)

Step 3: Apply Fixes

Interactive Mode: If user approves Automation Mode: Proceed directly based on auto-decision logic

  1. Apply fixes to the identified issues
  2. Use appropriate tools (Edit, Write, etc.) to modify code
  3. Follow project coding standards from CLAUDE.md
  4. Document changes made

Automation Mode Transparency:

  • auto_log mechanism and format: See CLAUDE.md「📚 共享概念速查 → auto_log」and skills/shared/auto_log_template.md
  • Example output: [Automated Fix Record] Fixed: 3 critical, 2 medium, 1 low | Skipped: 1 medium (business logic) 1. SQL injection (critical) → Fixed | 2. N+1 query (medium) → Fixed 3. Variable naming (low) → Fixed | 4. Logic optimization (medium) → Skipped
Step 4: Increment and Validate
current_iteration = current_iteration + 1

Check termination conditions:

Standard Review Mode:

  • Success: Review tool reports no issues → Exit loop, report success
  • Max iterations reached: current_iteration > max_iterations → Exit loop, report remaining issues
  • User cancellation: User declined fixes → Exit loop
  • Continue: Issues remain and iterations < max_iterations → Go to Step 1

Final Validation Mode (Project Completion/Final Verification):

  • Minimum Pass Requirement: MUST complete at least 2 passes

- Pass 1: mcp__zen__codereview (first_review_done = true) - Pass 2: mcp__zen__clink with codex CLI

  • Early Exit Prevention:

- If current_iteration < 2 → MUST continue to Step 1 (even if no issues found) - If current_iteration >= 2 AND no issues found in both passes → Exit loop, report success

  • Max iterations reached: current_iteration > max_iterations → Exit loop, report remaining issues
  • User cancellation: User declined fixes → Exit loop
  • Continue: Issues remain OR minimum passes not met → Go to Step 1

Termination and Reporting

When the cycle terminates, provide a final report:

Code Review Completion Report:

Review rounds: X / 5
Reviewed files: [list files]

Tools used:
- Round 1: mcp__zen__codereview (codex workflow validation)
- Round 2: mcp__zen__clink (codex CLI direct analysis)
- Round 3+: mcp__zen__clink (continued)

Final status:
- All issues fixed / Max reviews reached / User cancelled
- [Final Validation Mode] Completed minimum 2 passes / Did not meet minimum 2 pass requirement

Fix summary:
- Fixed issues: X
- Remaining issues: Y (if any)

Recommendations: [next steps]

Code Quality Standards

This skill enforces standards defined in:

  • CLAUDE.md: Global rules (G1-G11), phase-specific requirements (P1-P4), model development workflow
  • Project-specific: PROJECTWIKI.md architecture decisions and conventions

Key quality dimensions checked:

  1. Code Quality: Readability, maintainability, complexity
  2. Security: Vulnerabilities, sensitive data handling
  3. Performance: Efficiency, resource usage
  4. Architecture: Adherence to documented design decisions
  5. Documentation: Code comments, PROJECTWIKI.md alignment

Test Coverage Standards (G9 Compliance):

  • coverage_target usage and thresholds: See CLAUDE.md「📚 共享概念速查」

See references/quality_standards/README.md for on-demand quality standards (load specific files as needed).

Best Practices

For Effective Reviews

  1. Scope Control: Review recently modified files only (use git diff/status)
  2. Context Preservation: Maintain continuation_id across review cycles for context continuity
  3. Incremental Fixes: Address high-severity issues first, then iterate for lower-priority ones
  4. User Communication: Always explain WHY an issue matters and HOW the fix improves code

Error Handling

  • Tool Errors: If mcp__zen__codereview fails, report to user and offer manual review
  • Ambiguous Issues: When codex findings are unclear, seek user clarification before fixing
  • Conflicting Standards: If global and project-specific CLAUDE.md conflict, prioritize global CLAUDE.md

Resources

references/quality_standards/README.md

Quality standards index and on-demand loading guide. Load this reference when:

  • Need overview of available quality standards
  • Detailed quality criteria are needed

Then load specific standard files as needed:

  • global_rules.md - G1-G8 全局规则
  • core_principles.md - 核心开发原则
  • p3_constraints_and_quality.md - P3执行约束
  • commit_and_quality_gates.md - Conventional Commits规范
  • error_handling_and_usage.md - P4错误处理

Use grep patterns to search: G1|G2|core principles|ethics|reproducible

Example Usage

Example 1: Interactive Mode (Default)

User: "Use codex to check the code"

Workflow:

  1. Identify files: src/features.py, src/model_training.py
  2. Read context: [AUTOMATION_MODE: false] → Interactive mode
  3. Round 1 (mcp__zen__codereview): Found 3 issues (1 critical, 1 medium, 1 low)
  4. Ask user approval → User: "Yes"
  5. Apply fixes
  6. Round 2 (mcp__zen__clink): No new issues
  7. Result: All issues fixed in 2/5 rounds

Example 2: Full Automation Mode ⭐

User Initial Request: "Full automation, help me develop login functionality, automatically check quality after code completion"

Main Router: Detects "full automation" → Sets automation_mode = true

After code generation, Main Claude invokes codex-code-reviewer with automation_mode = true:

Assistant:

Alright, I will use codex to systematically review the just-generated code.

First, let me identify recently modified files...
[Running git status]

Found the following modified files:
- src/auth/login.py
- src/auth/session.py
- tests/test_login.py

Reading context: [AUTOMATION_MODE: true]
Mode: Full automation review (automatically select and apply fixes)

Starting round 1 review...
[Calling mcp__zen__codereview]

Review results:
Found 5 issues:
[Critical] src/auth/login.py:45 - SQL injection risk (critical)
[Critical] src/auth/session.py:23 - Plaintext password storage (critical)
[Medium] src/auth/login.py:78 - Missing exception handling (medium)
[Medium] src/auth/session.py:56 - Performance issue: N+1 query (medium)
[Low] tests/test_login.py:12 - Non-standard test naming (low)

[Full Automation Mode] Auto-decision + fixes applied:

[Automated Fix Record] Fixed: 2 critical, 2 medium, 1 low
1. SQL injection (critical) → Fixed with parameterized queries
2. Plaintext password (critical) → Fixed with bcrypt encryption
3. Exception handling (medium) → Fixed with try-except blocks
4. N+1 query (medium) → Fixed with select_related optimization
5. Test naming (low) → Fixed by renaming to standard convention

Fixes completed. Starting round 2 review...
[Calling mcp__zen__clink with codex CLI]

Review results: No new issues found

Code review complete!
Review rounds: 2 / 5
Tools used:
- Round 1: mcp__zen__codereview
- Round 2: mcp__zen__clink (codex CLI)
Full automation mode: Auto-fixed 5 issues, skipped 0 issues
All issues successfully fixed without user intervention.

Key Differences: No user approval, auto-decision by severity/safety, transparent logging with rationale, same quality standards


Example 3: Final Validation Mode (Project Completion/Final Quality Verification) ⭐⭐

User: "Project is complete, please perform final quality verification"

Workflow:

  1. Detect: Project completion/final verification → Enable Final Validation Mode (min 2 rounds)
  2. Identify files: 5 core files (src + tests)
  3. Round 1 (mcp__zen__codereview): Found 2 issues (1 medium, 1 low)
  4. Ask user approval → User: "Yes" → Apply fixes
  5. Round 2 (mcp__zen__clink with codex CLI): No new issues
  6. Result: All issues fixed, minimum 2-round requirement met, quality verification passed

Key Features: Mandatory 2+ passes (codereview + clink), early exit prevention, comprehensive validation before release


Notes

  • Dual-tool approach: Iteration 1 uses mcp__zen__codereview, iteration 2+ uses mcp__zen__clink with codex CLI
  • Max 5 iterations, CLAUDE.md workflow compatible (P3/P4), three modes: Interactive (default) / Full Automation / Final Validation (2+ passes)
  • automation_mode & auto_log (READ FROM SSOT):

- Definitions and constraints: See CLAUDE.md「📚 共享概念速查」 - This skill: Skill Layer (read-only), outputs [Automated Decision Record] fragments when automation_mode=true

  • Final validation mode activated when user mentions "project completion" / "final verification" / "final quality validation"

平台分布

Codex

35.4%
按下载量换算25

Claude

30.33%
按下载量换算22

Cursor

17.95%
按下载量换算13

Gemini CLI

8.16%
按下载量换算6

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

调用外部服务

该 Skill 可能调用第三方服务、云服务或外部模型 API,使用前需要确认账号、额度、数据发送范围和服务条款。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills