> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://mintlify.com/openai/codex-plugin-cc/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# /codex:adversarial-review

> Run a steerable Codex review that challenges your implementation choices and design decisions.

Run a Codex review that questions whether your chosen approach is the right one — not just whether it is implemented correctly. The review challenges assumptions, surfaces tradeoffs, examines failure modes, and asks whether a different approach would have been safer or simpler.

This command uses the same review target selection as `/codex:review`, including `--base <ref>` for branch review. Unlike `/codex:review`, it accepts extra focus text after the flags to steer the review toward specific areas of concern.

## Syntax

```
/codex:adversarial-review [--wait|--background] [--base <ref>] [--scope auto|working-tree|branch] [focus ...]
```

## Flags

<ParamField path="--wait" type="boolean">
  Run the review in the foreground and wait for results.
</ParamField>

<ParamField path="--background" type="boolean">
  Run the review as a background job. Check progress with `/codex:status`.
</ParamField>

<ParamField path="--base" type="string">
  Compare against this git ref. Accepts a branch name, tag, or commit hash — for example, `main`.
</ParamField>

<ParamField path="--scope" type="string">
  Controls what is included in the review. Accepted values:

  * `auto` (default) — reviews the working tree if dirty, otherwise compares against the detected default branch
  * `working-tree` — always reviews uncommitted changes
  * `branch` — compares against the auto-detected default branch (`main`, `master`, or `trunk`)
</ParamField>

<ParamField path="focus text" type="string">
  Optional positional text added after the flags. Use this to give the review a specific focus — for example, challenge whether this was the right caching and retry design.
</ParamField>

## Examples

```bash theme={null}
/codex:adversarial-review
/codex:adversarial-review --base main challenge whether this was the right caching and retry design
/codex:adversarial-review --background look for race conditions and question the chosen approach
```

## When to use it

* Before shipping, when you want to challenge the direction — not just catch implementation bugs
* When you want focused scrutiny on design choices, tradeoffs, and hidden assumptions
* When you want to pressure-test specific risk areas like authentication, data loss, rollback behavior, race conditions, or reliability under failure

## Difference from `/codex:review`

`/codex:review` maps directly to the built-in Codex reviewer and does not support custom focus text. `/codex:adversarial-review` accepts extra focus text and frames the review around whether the approach itself is sound, rather than whether the implementation is correct.

<Note>
  This command is read-only. It does not fix code or apply any changes to your repository.
</Note>