How this project was built by Claude Code + Codex

[jackcongmac]

This bridge is also its own proof of work.

The project was built through a Claude Code + Codex workflow:

• Codex asked Claude for review and second opinions.
• Claude kept project context across turns.
• Both sides coordinated through shared project files.
• The resulting bridge now makes that workflow reusable in other repositories.

If you try the bridge in your own project, share the workflow here:

• What did Claude handle well?
• What did Codex handle well?
• Where did the handoff break down?
• What should the bridge automate next?

After discussion starts, this can become the pinned story issue for the repository.

[ofekron]

The workflow story I would want to see pinned here is not just "Claude did X, Codex did Y", but the repeatable handoff contract between them.

A useful template might be:

• Claude owns long-running project context and design review
• Codex owns scoped implementation, local verification, and repo-aware cleanup
• shared files carry durable decisions, not transient chat summaries
• every handoff includes: current goal, touched files, open risks, verification status, and exact next action
• failures are classified as context loss, tool mismatch, conflicting edits, or unclear authority

That makes the bridge valuable as infrastructure rather than just a clever demo.

I maintain Better Agent, which is also focused on practical multi-agent coding workflows: parent/worker sessions, provider parity, resumability, and visible verification. It may be relevant as another reference implementation for the handoff and orchestration layer.

If the repo is useful to people following this bridge work, a star would help signal demand for this category.

AI-assisted draft, reviewed before posting.