From the experiment

Do coding agents recommend Codex code review?

Codex code review was chosen in 8% of 526 judged code review sessions, ranking fifth. Measured with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code.

Published October 14, 2026 Read as Markdown

Codex code review was chosen in 8% of 526 judged code review sessions, ranking fifth. It was also raised as a candidate in 5 further sessions without being chosen.

This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code had to solve a problem in code review inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about Codex code review. What an agent actually installed.

The numbers

CategoryCode review
Sessions in the category526
Sessions where Codex code review was chosen44
Install share8%
Rank in category5 of 21
Codebases it won in7
Raised as a candidate, not chosen5
Chosen when considered90%
Siteopenai.com

By agent

The agents treat Codex code review very differently. Codex chose it in 28% of its sessions in this category and Claude Code in 0%, a spread of 28 points.

AgentSessionsChose Codex code reviewShare
Claude Code13000%
Codex1604428%
Cursor12000%
Grok Build CLI3000%
Muse Code8600%

A single blended install share would report the midpoint and hide both ends. If most of your users run Claude Code, your real position here is 0%, not 8%.

By who was asking

Codex code review performs similarly across the four kinds of buyer, from 1% to 15%. That is unusual: the category leader changed with the persona in 24 of the 31 categories we measured.

Who is askingSessionsChose Codex code reviewShare
Vibe coder1061615%
Junior developer164117%
Senior engineer1061514%
Enterprise team15021%

What Codex code review was up against

The full ranking in code review, from the same sessions:

#ProductRuns wonShare
1Claude Code review10219%
2Cursor Bugbot9117%
3CodeRabbit8817%
4Qodo Merge5510%
5Codex code review (this page)448%
6Built in-house (no product adopted)408%
7GitHub Copilot code review316%
8Semgrep224%

What this means

Agents almost never raise Codex code review without choosing it: 5 sessions raised against 44 chosen. When it gets considered, it usually wins. The constraint is how rarely it gets considered at all, which is a presence problem: templates, framework integrations and pages that answer the configuration and production questions agents actually search for.

Where these numbers come from

The 526 sessions in code review are part of a published set of 15,287, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.

Every code review run can be replayed on the board.

If you work on Codex code review: the judge recorded a reason for every session where it was raised and passed over. Those reasons are in the transcripts.

<!-- generated by scripts/write-data-pages.mjs -->

Common questions

Do coding agents recommend Codex code review?

Yes. Codex code review was chosen in 44 of the 526 judged sessions in code review, a 8% install share, ranking fifth in its category.

Does Claude Code recommend Codex code review?

In 0 of the 130 sessions in code review run with Claude Code, which is 0%.

Do different coding agents treat Codex code review differently?

Yes, and by a wide margin. Codex chose it in 28% of its runs and Claude Code in 0%.

How was this measured?

Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 110 realistic codebases and asked to solve real tasks. A simulated project owner approved or questioned each recommendation before any code was written, and a judge from a model family that builds none of the agents read every session blind.

How often is Codex code review considered but not chosen?

It was raised as a candidate in 5 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 44. That is a 90% conversion from considered to chosen.

Where this comes from

Armature ran 15,287 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code inside 110 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.

Read next

All library pages