yetone
61e296688e
10086gg reported that Codex's auto-review through magpie almost never used codex-auto-review. It ran on the conversation's own model at low effort, which costs more. Cause: codexModels narrows the ChatGPT backend's list to the models the user picked on the codex provider (CodexNativePicked). Hidden entries (visibility "hide") never reach magpie's catalog (parseCodexModels), so no one can pick them, and the narrowing always dropped them. codex-auto-review is one of those hidden entries. Codex 0.162 picks the reviewer this way (codex-rs/ext/guardian-reviewer/src/model.rs, select_review_model): 1. the entry's auto_review_model_override; 2. else codex-auto-review, if the list has it; 3. else the conversation's model, at low effort. So once the list was narrowed, every review fell to step 3. On a relay model it was charged to the relay; on a ChatGPT model it ran on that model. OpenCodex had the same bug: lidge-jun/opencodex#6712 recorded direct ChatGPT login as codex-auto-review/low and their proxy as Sol/low. Fix: the narrowing keeps hidden entries. No picker shows them, so the user's picks still decide what Codex's /model lists. A user who wants reviews on a relay model can still set Codex's auto-review model (#938), and that setting still wins (step 1). Which account pays changes for a user with picks whose conversation runs on a relay model: auto-review moves from the relay to the ChatGPT account's codex-auto-review. That is what Codex does without magpie. OpenAI's help article "Using Codex with your ChatGPT plan" says: "When you're signed in with a ChatGPT account, auto-review safety checks are free and don't count toward your plan's usage limits." New test TestCodexModelListPicksKeepHidden. It fails on the old code: after the picks only gpt-6-sol is listed, with no codex-auto-review. docs/subsystems/gateway-routing.md says this. Run: - gofmt -l internal/gateway - go vet -tags nogui ./internal/gateway, on darwin, linux and windows - go test -tags nogui ./... with a temp HOME and pinned caches: green Not run: a real Codex signed in to ChatGPT through the gateway. The reviewer choice was read from the Codex source.
Subsystem design references
These pages describe current responsibilities, runtime paths, state, and contracts. Start with the subsystem relevant to your task, then follow its source links to verify the implementation you change.
| Subsystem | Reference |
|---|---|
| Built-in subscriptions moving to plugins | Provider and plugin ownership |
| Plugins that run on the gateway's requests and replies | Gateway middleware |
| Claude subscription turns across Claude Code runs | Claude subscription bridge |
| How the gateway picks a provider, key or account, and falls back | Gateway routing and fallback |
| Gateway Session Aggregation | Gateway Session Aggregation |
| Connecting an agent's config to the gateway, drift, disconnect, WSL twins | Agent wiring |
| Providers, keys, subscription accounts, refresh and allowance | Providers and accounts |
| Instructions, MCP servers, skills and RTK written into agents | Library |
Tray, panel, window, magpie web and the page's JSON API |
GUI app shell |
A subsystem can span several packages or repositories. Its reference describes the behavior those parts provide together; it does not need to list every function.
Maintain a reference
Update the owning reference in the same PR when a change alters a documented responsibility, interface, state transition, runtime path, compatibility rule, or failure behavior. An internal refactor that preserves these contracts does not require a prose change.
Keep each fact in one reference and link to it from agent instructions or other pages. Link to source files and named symbols rather than copying implementation details that change frequently. Explain field meanings and constraints that signatures alone do not express.
For a new reference, include the responsibilities and boundaries, source of truth, main runtime paths, state transitions, important constraints, and existing verification commands. Include failure and compatibility behavior where relevant. Document current behavior separately from proposed changes; the proposal belongs in its issue or PR.
Describe a PR's semantic changes
For each affected subsystem, explain the observable change with its trigger and before/after behavior. Include changes to interfaces, state, compatibility, and failure behavior when relevant. Link the affected reference, implementation, and verification evidence. State when a refactor preserves the documented behavior.
For example, a change to plugin adoption should explain which migration state and account condition trigger it, which implementation handles requests before and after adoption, and which test exercises that transition.
This is an author-provided explanation that a reviewer verifies against the diff and surrounding code. It is not an automatically proven compatibility verdict.
Review a change
- Identify the affected subsystem and the actual runtime path, including plugin or built-in ownership.
- Compare the claimed before/after behavior with the base and head implementation. Trace relevant callers and state transitions beyond the changed lines.
- Check that changed contracts appear in the owning reference and that source links still resolve.
- Check that the cited tests or runtime evidence exercise the claimed behavior. Report checks that were not run.
A documentation update alone does not prove the implementation. Existing tests and runtime evidence remain necessary for behavior changes.