Comment by edf13
15 hours ago
Nice - I do something similar in a semi manual way.
I do find Codex very good at reviewing work marked as completed by Claude, especially when I get Claude to write up its work with a why,where & how doc.
It’s very rare Claude has fully completed the task successfully and Codex doesn’t find issues.
I created the first version of loop after getting tired of doing this manually!
I’m going to take a look today!
Do you see any benefit in doing this locally versus having Codex review the PR Claude generates?
The feedback loop is faster. But PR reviews are still useful as they are multiplayer (meaning that you and another human reviewer can talk about a specific agent's comment directly on the diff, which is very useful sometimes).
Claude is also good at that. I made a habit of asking "are you sure?" after a complex task. It usually says it overlooked something.
I find both to be true. I use Claude for most of the implementation, and Codex always catches mistakes. Always. But both of them benefit from being asked if they’re sure they did everything.