openai / openai/codex-plugin-cc
/codex:review caps findings at ~3 — add configurable max or return all material findings
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- JavaScript
- Stars
- 33.3k
- Forks
- 2.3k
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Problem
Native /codex:review consistently returns at most 2–3 findings per run, regardless of diff size. On a ~1000-line refactor touching 13 files, the reviewer found real P1/P2 bugs — but only 2–3 per iteration. It took 8 sequential review→fix cycles to surface ~20 legitimate issues that were all present in the original diff.
This forces a tedious manual loop:
/codex:review→ get 3 findings- Fix them
/codex:review→ get 3 more- Fix them
- Repeat 6+ more times
Each cycle costs tokens and wall-clock time. The reviewer clearly can find more issues — it just stops early.
Expected behavior
The reviewer should return all material findings it discovers, not an arbitrary subset. At minimum, provide a way to configure the cap:
/codex:review --max-findings 10
or a setting in /codex:setup:
{ "reviewMaxFindings": 10 }
Context
/codex:adversarial-reviewuses a local prompt (prompts/adversarial-review.md) without a hard cap — but native review goes through thereview/startserver API where the limit appears to be baked in.- Issue #6 mentions "Top 3 focus areas only" for diffs <50 lines, but this cap seems to apply universally regardless of diff size.
- A reasonable default could scale with diff size (as #6 proposes), but even a static configurable max would be a big improvement.
Workaround
Currently using iterative review→fix loops, which works but is slow and expensive.
This issue was co-authored with Claude Code (Opus 4.6) during a real review session where the 3-finding cap was the bottleneck.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start at the /codex:review entry point and trace its request to the review/start server API; compare it with prompts/adversarial-review.md and the configuration path in /codex:setup. Define whether a command flag or setting controls the limit, then verify that a large diff can return more than three material findings without iterative review cycles.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- javascript
- Domain
- api, cli
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 48/100