Claude Code + Codex = AI GOD

CChase AI
Computing/SoftwareSmall Business/StartupsInternet Technology

Transcript

00:00:00So we can now use Codex inside of Claude Code.
00:00:03OpenAI has made it.
00:00:04So the number one competitor to Opus 4.6
00:00:08is now something you can use
00:00:09inside of the anthropic ecosystem.
00:00:11And this is great news for all Claude Code enjoyers,
00:00:15especially if you're someone who has been struggling
00:00:18with usage rates, because frankly,
00:00:20Codex gives you a way better bang for your buck
00:00:23in terms of dollar to credit slash tokens.
00:00:26And so in this video, I'm gonna show you how to set it up
00:00:28and we're gonna go through what Codex can actually do
00:00:31with the Claude Code harness on top of it.
00:00:33And more importantly, what we can do using Claude Code
00:00:38with Opus 4.6 and Codex together, right?
00:00:40How can we play these two models off one another
00:00:43to get a sum that is greater than their parts?
00:00:46Now before we do the install, let's do a quick overview
00:00:48of what the Claude Code plugin brings us,
00:00:50because there's a few things.
00:00:51Now, the two most important things I would argue
00:00:54are the code reviews, right?
00:00:56The ability to essentially have it take a look
00:00:58at something Opus has written.
00:00:59And that goes into stages.
00:01:01First of all, we have the standard Codex review,
00:01:03which is just, you know, kind of a neutral review.
00:01:06You know, it's taking a look, it's just read only.
00:01:08The second one is adversarial review, which I love.
00:01:12So this is essentially telling Codex like,
00:01:13"Hey, take a look at what Opus have built
00:01:15or what any coding agent has built,
00:01:17but have a very discerning eye.
00:01:20Like kind of assume they screwed up
00:01:22and figure out what we can do to make it better."
00:01:25So this is an awesome way to really improve our outputs,
00:01:28because one of the issues with Opus
00:01:31and really a lot of AI models in general
00:01:33is they tend to do a bad job of evaluating their own code.
00:01:36This is something Anthropic talked about
00:01:38in their engineering blog that got released last week.
00:01:40So something like adversary review, perfect, love this.
00:01:44Other than that, we can also use Codex Rescue,
00:01:46which allows us to have Codex create something all on its own
00:01:49just like you would do with Opus inside of Claude Code.
00:01:52And then beyond that, just kind of like some status stuff,
00:01:54like taking a look at where it is in its particular job.
00:01:58So let's dive into this and take a look at the install.
00:02:01Now to install this is pretty simple.
00:02:02You're just gonna run this command
00:02:04to add it to the marketplace.
00:02:06And I'll have all these commands down in the description.
00:02:08And then you're gonna run this plugin command to install it,
00:02:11codex@openai-codex.
00:02:13As usual, ask where you want to install it.
00:02:14I'm gonna do user scope.
00:02:16And then we just need to reload the plugins
00:02:17to get it up and working.
00:02:18And then lastly, we want to run codex colon setup.
00:02:21In case you didn't realize, there's also a GitHub repo
00:02:24for this, which also goes over all of the install commands.
00:02:27So I'll link that in the description as well.
00:02:29And the usage rates are tied to your chat GPT account,
00:02:32even if you're on the free account, apparently.
00:02:34So just understand it's going to be pulling
00:02:36from your Codex usage.
00:02:37It's gonna ask if you want to install Codex, yes.
00:02:39For that, you log in and that will send you to the browser
00:02:42where it runs you through the authentication process.
00:02:44Now there's really two obvious use cases
00:02:47for this Codex tool inside of Claude Code.
00:02:49The first one is dealing with the usage limits
00:02:52inside of Claude Code.
00:02:53Normally, if you're on the pro plan with Anthropic
00:02:55or the 5x max, you can hit those limits very quickly,
00:02:58especially with some of the CLI bugs
00:03:00we've been seeing in the last week.
00:03:02If that's the case, what you might want to do
00:03:03is use Opus 4.6 to plan and Codex to execute.
00:03:07And to do that, again, very simple.
00:03:09You're just gonna do codex rescue.
00:03:11And then from there, you're going to give it the prompt.
00:03:14And you can also specify a whole bunch of things.
00:03:16Like you see all the flags here,
00:03:18including the effort level and all that.
00:03:20And remember, Codex, the model is very solid.
00:03:24And again, the usage isn't even close
00:03:26to what Anthropic charges.
00:03:27But I think the more interesting use case
00:03:28is what I talked about earlier,
00:03:29and that's the adversarial review.
00:03:30So let's put that to the test.
00:03:32So I'm gonna have it take a look
00:03:33at my Twitter engagement/research bot.
00:03:37This is the web app I had Claude Code build.
00:03:39Essentially what it does is it scans tweets in the AI space
00:03:43for every like 30 to 45 minutes.
00:03:45It has a quality filter.
00:03:47It has scoring signals
00:03:48based on a number of different parameters.
00:03:50It's connected to Superbase
00:03:51to make sure the tweets don't get repeated.
00:03:53It has a scoring system and integrates softmax, PIX.
00:03:56Everything gets pushed to Telegram.
00:03:58And I also have AI builds in there to help with responses.
00:04:00So there's a fair amount going on.
00:04:02And then on top of that,
00:04:03it also tracks like all of my responses
00:04:06so we can kind of have a feedback loop.
00:04:07So this is like a relatively, it's not super complicated,
00:04:10but this isn't like a landing page we're having a look at.
00:04:13So we're going to see what Codex comes back with.
00:04:16When we do an adversary review on the code for this, right?
00:04:20So let's see how it does.
00:04:22So we'll keep it pretty open to interpretation.
00:04:23So we're telling Codex,
00:04:24take a look at the code base and let me know what you think.
00:04:27And the first thing it does is it tells us,
00:04:28hey, we're going to estimate the review size
00:04:30to determine the best mode.
00:04:32And then from there it says, hey,
00:04:33do you want to run it in the background
00:04:34or do you just want to wait for the results?
00:04:35So we're just going to wait for the results.
00:04:37And it's telling us review scope includes the full code base
00:04:39plus nine working tree changes, one modified file,
00:04:42eight untracked files.
00:04:43So it knows there's a kind of,
00:04:44there's a lot it needs to take a look at.
00:04:46And while that's working,
00:04:47let's talk about how adversarial review is actually working.
00:04:49So we just kind of saw the first four parts, right?
00:04:52It parsed the arguments.
00:04:54We didn't pass any flags,
00:04:55so it's just going off its default settings.
00:04:57And then it estimated the review size,
00:04:59resolved the target and collected some context.
00:05:01That was all that text about, hey, you know,
00:05:03we have these untracked changes
00:05:04and this is going to take a while.
00:05:05Now, after those first four steps,
00:05:06it's then going to build the adversarial prompt
00:05:09and there's seven attack surfaces
00:05:11it's going to pay special attention to.
00:05:13That's authentication, data loss, rollbacks,
00:05:17race conditions, degraded dependencies,
00:05:20version skew and observability gaps, right?
00:05:23So like seven things that are somewhat under the surface
00:05:26that could really screw us
00:05:27if we try to push this to production
00:05:29and we don't have a handle on.
00:05:30From there, it's going to send all that information
00:05:31back to the OpenAI server, so Codex can take a look at it.
00:05:34And then it will give us our structured JSON output
00:05:37and we should expect it to look something like this, right?
00:05:41And it will give us some sort of severity of its findings,
00:05:43right, versus critical, high, medium and low,
00:05:46as well as recommendations and next steps.
00:05:48But all you have to do is sit there inside of Clod code
00:05:51and wait for the response.
00:05:52So Codex came back with four issues with our code base
00:05:54and all of them had a severity of high
00:05:57and I pasted this over to Excalidraw
00:05:58so it's a little easier for us to go through it.
00:06:00So for each one of these, it gives us the severity,
00:06:02the area, the actual issue, the files,
00:06:06as well as the actual lines of code
00:06:08we need to take a look at.
00:06:09And then importantly, like what's the actual impact here
00:06:12as well as the fix?
00:06:13So number one, it's saying we had an issue
00:06:15with our dead up logic.
00:06:16Number two was how we were dealing with Telegram polling.
00:06:19Third was our schema drift.
00:06:21And then lastly was our actual dashboard build.
00:06:24So this is actually relatively important stuff
00:06:27and luckily it doesn't look like the fixes
00:06:29would be too difficult to implement.
00:06:31But what I'm interested in is,
00:06:33okay, this is what Codex gave us.
00:06:35What would Clod give us if we asked for a similar,
00:06:40you know, sort of adversarial review on its own code base?
00:06:43Because I think that would be kind of enlightening
00:06:45to see them head to head
00:06:46and like what Codex really does differently than the other.
00:06:48'Cause for all we know, they're exactly the same
00:06:50and this whole video was pointless.
00:06:52So I'm now having Opus run the same
00:06:55sort of adversarial code review.
00:06:56I had Codex come up with a particular prompt.
00:06:59So essentially it's just saying,
00:07:00hey, I want you to challenge the implementation,
00:07:02the design choices.
00:07:04Here's some things I want you to evaluate.
00:07:05And then here's the sort of output format.
00:07:07So let's see what it comes back with.
00:07:09And so here's the results broken down.
00:07:11So first of all, they did have one shared finding.
00:07:13So they both agreed that the Telegram issue was a problem.
00:07:17So this was the one issue that they both found
00:07:20and that they said was either high or critical.
00:07:23Codex said it was just high
00:07:24and then Opus said it was critical.
00:07:26Opus itself found seven other additional issues
00:07:30ranked high or critical that Codex didn't.
00:07:32Now we're not saying that just by virtue of saying
00:07:36there's more issues that Opus
00:07:37was necessarily better than Codex.
00:07:39Just pointing out, it found seven things
00:07:41we might want to look at that Codex didn't.
00:07:43Then obviously on the flip side,
00:07:45we found three issues with Codex that Opus missed.
00:07:48So what does this mean
00:07:49if we kind of look at this in totality?
00:07:50Does this mean Opus is better than Codex
00:07:51because it found more or that Codex is better than Opus
00:07:54'cause it narrowed down on four
00:07:56and didn't take us onto a weird path?
00:07:58I think what you draw from this
00:07:59is kind of whatever you want to draw from this.
00:08:01And that probably is that there is kind of value
00:08:04of having these two systems.
00:08:05Look at it, right?
00:08:06A second pair of eyes versus having Opus grade Opus
00:08:09all the time.
00:08:10There is some sort of fundamental flaw, I think,
00:08:13with having the same AI system do the planning,
00:08:16the generating, and the evaluating.
00:08:17And if we're able to very easily bring in Codex,
00:08:20especially at its price point,
00:08:22to even just do things like this,
00:08:24like an adversarial review,
00:08:25again, that's like one of the great AI coding
00:08:28on the margin plays, which again is like, why not?
00:08:30If you're already paying for ChatGPT,
00:08:34if you're already paying the 20 bucks a month,
00:08:35and I can now bring in this and kind of have Codex
00:08:37just take a look at anything,
00:08:38this simply like, what's the downside to this really?
00:08:43I mean, I don't think any quick tests like this,
00:08:47we're going to have any definitive answers like,
00:08:48oh, Codex is better versus Opus.
00:08:50And I think that whole conversation
00:08:51sort of misses the point.
00:08:52This is just like one more tool in our toolbox
00:08:54and now we can use it.
00:08:55So I think this is great.
00:08:56Now we can get way more specific
00:08:58with adversarial review as well,
00:09:00because our prompt was pretty just like open and out there
00:09:03and it was able to interpret it in a lot of different ways,
00:09:06but just based off of the GitHub examples, right?
00:09:08You can get pretty specific
00:09:09about what you want Codex to look at.
00:09:11So overall, I think this is a great addition
00:09:13to the Cloud Code ecosystem.
00:09:14The more tools, the better,
00:09:15especially if you're someone who either A,
00:09:17is already paying for ChatGPT,
00:09:19or B, is like on the Anthropic Pro plan,
00:09:22and then maybe you are paying for ChatGPT,
00:09:23a hundred bucks a month might be a little much,
00:09:25200 bucks might certainly be too much.
00:09:28Like this almost gives us like this middle ground
00:09:30between the $20 sub and the $100 sub,
00:09:33because Codex really is a great value play.
00:09:36So definitely check it out, super easy setup.
00:09:39Let me know what you thought,
00:09:41and as always, I'll see you around.

Key Takeaway

Integrating Codex into Claude Code provides a cost-effective secondary layer for adversarial code reviews, catching critical logic and infrastructure flaws that the primary Opus model may overlook during self-evaluation.

Highlights

OpenAI's Codex model is now compatible as a plugin within the Anthropic Claude Code CLI ecosystem.

Adversarial review mode targets seven specific attack surfaces including race conditions, data loss, and observability gaps.

Codex offers a higher token-to-dollar ratio compared to the standard Anthropic Claude Opus 4.6 usage rates.

A head-to-head comparison on a Twitter research bot codebase showed Codex identifying four high-severity issues while Opus identified eight.

Installation requires adding the plugin to the marketplace and authenticating via a standard ChatGPT account.

Timeline

Codex Integration and Value Proposition

  • Codex functions as a direct technical peer to Opus 4.6 within the same terminal environment.
  • Usage rates for Codex provide a significantly better 'bang for your buck' in terms of dollar-to-credit conversion.
  • The plugin enables specialized features like neutral read-only reviews and high-intensity adversarial reviews.

The integration addresses the tendency of AI models to struggle with evaluating their own generated outputs. By bringing OpenAI's model into the Anthropic ecosystem, developers can utilize Codex Rescue for autonomous creation or status tracking for ongoing jobs. This setup mitigates the high costs and usage limits associated with the Anthropic Pro and 5x Max plans.

Installation and Authentication Workflow

  • The setup process involves three CLI commands for marketplace addition, plugin installation, and model configuration.
  • Authentication links the CLI directly to an existing OpenAI or ChatGPT account for usage tracking.
  • A dedicated GitHub repository contains all necessary documentation and updated install commands.

Users initiate the process by running a marketplace add command followed by a specific codex@openai-codex install string. The configuration supports user-scope installation and requires a plugin reload to activate. Even users on free ChatGPT accounts can utilize the tool, as it draws directly from the Codex usage quota associated with that account.

Adversarial Review Mechanics and Use Cases

  • The adversarial prompt forces the model to assume the existing code contains errors or oversights.
  • Reviewers monitor seven distinct technical areas including version skew, degraded dependencies, and rollback logic.
  • The system generates structured JSON outputs detailing severity levels from low to critical.

One primary use case involves using Opus 4.6 for initial architectural planning and Codex for the high-volume execution phase to save credits. During an adversarial review, the model parses arguments and collects context from both the full codebase and untracked file changes. This process targets deep infrastructure issues that often go unnoticed before production, such as authentication gaps or schema drift.

Comparative Performance Analysis

  • Codex and Opus shared only one finding regarding Telegram polling issues in a live test.
  • Opus identified seven unique high-severity issues while Codex identified three unique issues that Opus missed.
  • Using two different AI systems for generation and evaluation removes the fundamental flaw of an AI grading its own work.

Testing on a Twitter engagement bot revealed that while Opus 4.6 is more verbose in its findings, Codex acts as a focused second pair of eyes. Codex flagged specific problems in deduplication logic and dashboard builds that the generating model overlooked. This multi-model approach acts as a 'middle ground' for developers who need high-tier performance without the full $200 monthly subscription costs of higher-tier API plans.

Community Posts

View all posts