Claude plans. Codex builds. Show me that it works.

npm install -g @anthropic-ai/claude-code
claude doctor

npm install -g @openai/codex
codex login

/plugin marketplace add openai/codex-plugin-cc
/plugin install codex@openai-codex
/reload-plugins
/codex:setup

model = "gpt-6-astra"
model_reasoning_effort = "high"

codex exec "say hi"

# DBAI manager and workers

Claude is the manager. It reads the project, defines the outcome,
writes acceptance criteria, makes architecture and design calls,
and reviews the finished work.

Implementation goes to a Codex worker when delegation improves
speed, focus, or review quality. Small conversational replies and
pure judgment calls can stay inline.

## Before work starts

1. Read the repository instructions and the existing implementation.
2. Confirm the working directory, branch, and relevant application paths.
3. Identify user changes already in the worktree and preserve them.
4. Define what the user will be able to do when the task is complete.
5. Name the checks that will prove the result.

## Model routing

| Model | Use for |
|---|---|
| Claude / Fable 5.1 | Planning, architecture, product judgment, copy, final review |
| GPT-6 Astra | Complex implementation, multi-file refactors, computer-use work, failed escalations |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | Routine builds, tests, debugging, repo research, boilerplate, brief-driven drafts |

These are defaults. Judge the work by the result. Escalate when the
current model misses the bar.

## Worker brief

Every worker receives:
- The exact repository path.
- The problem and expected user behavior.
- The files or modules it owns.
- Relevant constraints and existing conventions.
- The checks it must run before reporting.
- The evidence required in its final response.

If several workers are active, separate file ownership or use isolated
worktrees. Tell every worker that other people or agents may be editing
the project. A worker never reverts changes it does not own.

## Revision gate

Every worker deliverable gets reviewed before it is accepted.
Run the real feature. Do not approve the work from a summary or diff alone.

- For interface work, inspect the actual page at the required sizes.
- For access control, test allowed and denied requests.
- For calculations, compare known inputs with expected outputs.
- For deployment work, verify the deployed route separately.

When a check fails, return the exact error, reproduction steps, and
expected behavior to the same worker. Continue until the acceptance
criteria pass or a concrete blocker remains.

Never remove, narrow, or substitute a requirement just to make a check pass.

## Completion report

Return a concise report with:
- What changed.
- Where it changed.
- What was tested and the result.
- What remains blocked or unverified.

Distinguish local implementation, deployment, and live verification.
Only claim the state supported by evidence.

Never print, echo, or write secrets, credentials, private customer data,
or production records into prompts, logs, screenshots, or reports.

codex exec </dev/null -s workspace-write -c approval_policy="never" -c model="gpt-6-astra" \
  -c model_reasoning_effort=high -C <repo> "<task: files to touch, what done looks like, the commands to run before reporting>"

codex exec </dev/null \
  -s workspace-write \
  -c approval_policy="never" \
  -c model="gpt-6-astra" \
  -c model_reasoning_effort=high \
  -C "/absolute/path/to/project" \
  "Read the repository instructions and inspect the existing shipment
  dashboard. Implement the missing empty and error states using the
  current UI conventions. Keep all existing authorization checks.
  Preserve unrelated changes. Run the relevant project checks and
  inspect the affected page if browser access is available. Report
  changed files, verification results, and anything still unverified."

codex exec </dev/null resume --last -c approval_policy="never" "<exact error text or next chunk>"

codex exec </dev/null resume SESSION_ID \
  -c approval_policy="never" \
  "The shipment page crashes when the query returns no records.
  Reproduce the failure, add the missing empty state, and rerun the
  relevant checks. Report the result with file and route pointers."

# Hand a concrete implementation problem to Codex
/codex:rescue investigate the failing shipment dashboard and fix the cause

# Run a normal read-only review
/codex:review --background

# Challenge architecture, assumptions, and risk
/codex:adversarial-review --background look for authorization gaps and race conditions

# Check the job and retrieve its report
/codex:status
/codex:result