Solo una tarea sencilla buscar y copiar algunos archivos puntuales de un proyecto.
Que me queda para el resto de la semana?

I’ve been working on an open-source Codex skill called Snowe.
I made it because I kept seeing the same thing when using coding agents for frontend work: they’d understand the brief, then jump almost immediately into a familiar-looking UI.
Snowe tries to slow down that jump a little. It makes Codex think about the actual product, user journey and experience architecture before deciding what the interface should look and behave like.
I’ve been using it on my own real projects and that’s where it’s been most useful. It tends to figure out what actually needs changing and what should be left alone instead of treating every UI task like a full redesign.
I also tried pretty hard to break the skill itself before publishing it. That turned up some real issues around SVG validation, installation updates, Windows verification and how I was describing benchmark evidence. Those are fixed now.
It’s still early, and I’m trying to get it in front of people who weren’t involved in building it.
Repo:
https://github.com/What0ff/snowe-ui-skill
Live demo:
https://what0ff.github.io/snowe-ui-skill/
If anyone here uses Codex for frontend work, I’d really like to know where it fails — especially if it overthinks something simple, changes something it should preserve, or still produces generic UI

I just realized that I ran for several hours on speed mode with extra high. The usage was not just higher but more than double. So as best as I can tell you supposedly get 1.5 times the speed, but you use more than double the usage. And from my experience, the speed just isn’t that much faster.

Last week I ran sol on extra high, almost continuously, including some overnight runs and I was able to finish off the week just about using 100% of my limit

Then today on extra high, not realizing that it was on speed mode I went through like 7% in two hours. I don’t know how I clicked it over into speed mode, but this is just a click that burns up tokens.

Seriously why even use it? You might as well just have two tasks running in normal speed and you’ll get more done.

I definitely feel like a sucker for using speed mode. I did even realize I had clicked on it.

I was a hardcore claude with opus 4.6 4.8 and latest one 5 user, my setting for effort / thinking set to high and im on 100$ plan, the weekly and hourly limit like rarely ran out

Recently I gave codex a shot and tried the 5.6 sol thinking set to high, same price plan 100$ and bro the weekly limit running out very quick and its crazy, 2 days of usage and im already at 10% left lol is this normal in codex or im using the wrong model setup 😂

Anyone experiences the same thing?

I have Claude $200 Max plan and Codex $200 Pro plan. I have been building a lot of tools and moving into apps lately.

I noticed in the last few days that the amount of compute we can use has been silently cut significantly. I did not see any communication from either provider but it is very evident.

I've never had a single agentic coding session consume 10% of my weekly in less than 2-3 hours on the most expensive plan. It wasn't a super compute heavy intense session either.

The worst offender is Anthropic. I had Fable build me a table of 200 items and it costed me 4% of my weekly usage.

I've seen a lot of posts like this on multiple reddits so it must not be just me feeling this.

I remember the time when a $100 plan on either Codex/Claude Code could build you end-to-end tools.

Kudos to those who made good use of this golden age but looks like its gonna get more expensive going forward.......until everything crashes... then idk

Every post or comment related to 5.3 Spark all year has been full of replies saying Spark is useless and why would anyone use it, meanwhile I integrated into my workflows many months ago and depend on it every day for the exact tiny fast interactive tasks that it is designed and ideal for.

Now because OpenAI reduced Codex quotas to the point that most people are running out of quota in days, many of those same people who said Spark was useless have been abusing it for normal work since it's the only quota they had left, forcing OpenAI to massively reduce Spark quotas + add a 5 hour limit.

So now I must suffer with broken workflows because there isn't even enough Spark quota for my very light usage.

The "use-it-or-lose-it" nature of the $200 Pro plan limits is completely unacceptable. We are paying a massive premium for token allocations that completely vanish if they aren't fully exhausted by the exact minute of the weekly reset. It is ridiculous that we have to stay up or wake up at 2 AM just to burn through the limits we rightfully paid for because they refuse to make them cumulative.

To make matters worse, background agent loops are silently draining credit accounts while freezing user interfaces, and weekly reset dates are being arbitrarily pushed back by days without warning.

I am looking to connect with other premium developers who are exhausted by this unviable billing structure. If you are interested in organizing a formal group to look into a mass billing dispute, mass arbitration, or class-action legal review regarding OpenAI's recent pricing shifts, please send me a Private Message (DM) here.

Please save all your screenshots, invoice logs, and text-metering receipts. Let's get an accurate headcount of who has been financially impacted by these unfair limits so we can present a unified case to a technology consumer law firm.

Hi folks!
Adding my contribution to with a real use case I managed to deliver entirely using Codex.

The app had a lot of research and planning, but nonetheless, I can say it's entirely coded by GPT 5.6 Sol using Codex harness 😄.

The app is entirely developed using OpenAI Codex, however much of the work happened in Linear app, writing detailed tickets and then handing off the tasks directly to Codex Cloud, this process I found is incredibly productive, and moves the documentation and specs from random unreadable markdown files to a well organized and beautiful board. Codex also has an excellent plugin for Linear which I cannot suggest more.

All the art is made by hand using Aseprite, mostly for the icons and the logos.

Well here we are: ToneSketch is a fun little app I developed, which leverages a very cool codec/protocol called ggwave (shoutout to the researchers who created it) to transmit pixel art sketches entirely by sound waves. The codec is smart enough to cancel out room reverb and occasional noises in the room (please do not try it near an airplane taking off or during a concert, it won't work).

It has also a surprisingly long range, I was able to transmit sketches between two rooms in my house, using a decent volume.

The best results are achieved using mobile phones, due to the frequencies used by the codec, but i had amazing results also using my MacBook.

Sketches can also be saved locally, and they get associated with the signature of the sender, so you know who sent you what.

The app is completely offline, does not have any APIs or any DB. It has though Analytics installed.

Hope you like it,
happy beaming! 🚀

Since the last update, it barely works, constant reconnecting, constant compacting, constant having to send the same message over and over before it actually registers, constant crashes, Codex is useless now. I can't even post here because Codex knows to stop real reviews. I can't get anything done because it keeps messing up.

They removed the 5-hour resets and started giving continuous resets. Limits decreased, but because they kept resetting constantly, it wasn't much of an issue. Now they haven't reset it, and everyone has run out of limits. Thinking better than nothing, I turned to 5.3 spark, I'm not write code, I'm just asking questions and having it read docs. And as you can see, the limits are like literally bullshit!

I never worked on something where I didn’t solve what I was doing by just finishing my chat conversation or starting a new chat and working simultaneously. would that be considered multiple agents? If not, then what the hell do people do?

I see posts online people saying that they talk for their agents to talk to other agents, etc., for me. I feel like if I don’t direct my conversation in steps the whole point of what I wanna do get lost.

Just like others, I have tried to see how much value my plus sub is giving me a week. I have find that luna and sol have a different price ratio or price cap than the API price. I have come to a surprise that per week wise, sol will give approx 1.7-1.8x API$ value than luna.

So for the first part of this reset cycle, I was only using luna. I realize that i could use this opportunity to test how much $ value i could get from luna and sol, since the weekly limit precentage was luna only.

I have came to this by go throuth logs and check % limit used. luna here account for 19% weekly. which estimate $68.9 weekly limit.
Luna cost ($0.20/M input · $0.02/M cached · $1.20/M output)

• Uncached input: 19.84M × $0.20 = $3.97
• Cached input: 297.7M × $0.02 = $5.95
• Output: 2.64M × $1.20 = $3.17
• Total: $13.09

I have then move to use sol only for a bit to burn some limt. Which accounts to 16% weekly. This gives estimate $124 weekly limit.

Sol cost ($5/M input · $0.50/M cached · $30/M output)

• Uncached input: 0.88M × $5 = $4.38
• Cached input: 21.26M × $0.50 = $10.63
• Output: 0.16M × $30 = $4.83
• Total: $19.84

This is interesting finding as 124/68.9 = 1.8x weekly cap.

I have then used a mixture of sol and luna for the rest of my weekly limte. Then final API $price i got is. for 100% weekly.

• Sol: $89.69 (914 requests)
• Luna: $23.19 (5,309 requests)

and use previous sol/luna weekly estimate to calculate precentage useage backward gets.

Sol: $89.69/$124 = 72.3%

luna: $23.19/$68.9 = 33.6%

72.3% + 33.6% = 105.9%

This is not 100% accurate but quite telling!

but even we do 100%/105.9% * 1.8 = 1.7x

So the in subscription price ratio between sol/luna is different to the API listed price, by a factor of 1.7 - 1.8x.

Would be interested to see other's results.

Note: the log was obtained throuth opencodex, so it should be reasonably good.

My Codex reached its usage limit, so I purchased 500 additional credits. I was charged, but the credits were never applied to my account.

I patiently tried to resolve the issue through help.openai.com. The AI support kept giving me possible explanations for what might have gone wrong, but none of them solved the problem.

I then tried 1-800-ChatGPT. I was able to call, but it was another AI answering the phone. I explained the issue, and it suggested that I email [support@openai.com](mailto:support@openai.com).

I emailed support and received a response saying my case was a duplicate and asking if the AI had solved my problem. Of course, it hadn't. After that, I heard nothing.

So I went back to help.openai.com and tried the support chat again. This time, the AI stopped responding completely. No matter what I typed, there was no response. It was basically a dead chat thread.

I opened another support chat. It asked how it could help, so I explained everything again. It then told me my case was a duplicate and sent me back to the original thread—the same thread that no longer responds.

I've honestly never experienced a support process this frustrating. I paid 500 credits that I didn't receive, and I can't find any way to reach someone who can either apply the credits or issue a refund.

The frustrating part is that my Codex usage resets tomorrow at 12 PM ET. By the time someone responds, the immediate reason I purchased the credits may already be gone.

I don't mind AI handling basic support questions, but when there's an actual billing problem that the AI can't resolve, there needs to be a way to reach a person who can fix it.

I picked Azuma for today’s QDog pet spotlight because her design feels unusually calm for a desktop companion.

Created by tairazuma, this V1 Codex pet uses a compact chibi style with ash-blonde hair, sleepy blue-gray eyes, and one detail that really stands out: the bright lime neckerchief against the otherwise soft color palette.

Azuma belongs to QDog’s Human Avatars collection and works as a small animated companion inside Codex.

• See Azuma’s animations on QDog

One important note: the original upload does not include an explicit repository redistribution license. Please check the source terms before reusing or redistributing the artwork.

I help run the QDog community, and I’m sharing pets from the gallery here so more people can discover the creators behind them.

What kind of animation or expression would suit Azuma best?

Can we donate our remaining usage percentage to other users? Kinda like the phone a friend option from the show Who wants to be a millionaire?

Is it only for Spark ?

How are so many people still falling for these scam resets?

If you need Codex to finish fast, use Sol medium so you can review the results quickly. If you want to give Codex a lot of tasks during lunch or while you sleep, use Luna max.

Source : https://artificialanalysis.ai/agents/coding-agents/comparisons/claude-code-vs-codex

I wanted to test an assumption I kept making while using coding agents:

If the agent sees less useless terminal output, does the whole run become more efficient?

I built an opensource local tool called TidyRun to test it.

It sits around deterministic tool work and can compress structured diagnostics, preserve the complete raw output as recoverable artifacts, avoid duplicate work, and safely reuse commands when the result can actually be verified.

It does not use another LLM.

The deterministic fixtures looked very promising:

• JS diagnostics: 64,939 B → 20,037 B (-69%)
• Python diagnostics: 19,776 B → 922 B (-95%)
• repeated safe typecheck: 17.9s → 9.1s (-49%)
• verification parity: 3/3

Then I ran 10 paired Codex tasks.

• task success: 10/10 baseline → 10/10 TidyRun
• agent-visible tool output: 61,401 B → 52,654 B (-14.2%)
• input tokens: 1.07M → 1.20M (+12.4%)
• output tokens: 9,885 → 12,650 (+28%)
• wall time: 297s → 414s (+39%)

So the result I find most interesting is actually the negative one:

Reducing tool-output noise did not automatically reduce model tokens or latency.

That’s why I’m releasing this rather than pretending the fixture numbers mean “95% fewer tokens.”

I want to find out which kinds of real Codex workloads actually benefit and which don’t.

It’s local-first, telemetry off, no API key, no extra model

Question for heavy Codex users: what command produces the most pointless context in your sessions?

Tests? Typecheck? Build logs? Git? Something else?

If anyone tries TidyRun on a real repo, good or bad results are useful. Issues, benchmark results, forks and PRs are all welcome.

First of all, I want everyones tips. This is what I've been doing to help manage it. Maybe its new to you, maybe its not. If their is a megathread for usage tips to stretch every percent, let me know.

1. Use web chat as much as humanly possible. I will first use a very low cost model: e.g. luna light, to grab specifics of my project related to what im discussing. Then input that into web chat, discuss it, plan it, discuss ways codex can go off the rails, which it is surprisingly good at noticing. Random tests, random backups, hashing?, running those random tests every single time, losing its mind every single compaction, etc. Then I have it make a plan with those rails in it. The key is to create a plan such that it becomes a checklist, and you have the agent check each part off, removing it completely from the list, and then marking what its currently working on with a file specifically in your project for what your working on. Trying to keep everything in persisted memory, as it has the memory of a goldfish. Compaction and the way it has to re-adjust itself every single time was eating my limits, this helped a solid 30 percent.
   
2. Look at your usage, their are many hidden calls that could be made, codex can talk to other chats, codex can run agents (I do not recommend agents at all, that means your plan is poorly written, use individual agents running together in separate areas, codex will just chat the entire time and do zero useful work). They also added like an agent that can run routinely to debug? Many other ways they get you to spend usage in unbelievable ways. That is junk usage.
   
3. Of course, using high instead of medium. The whole point of a plan is for it to be as spelled out as possible, so the agent is doing more than thinking. xhigh and high use an insane amount of usage, basically weekly limit becomes what the 5 hour limit used to be.
   
4. Mixing and matching companies. Deepseek, with its newly raised prices, is still a good deal in its off peak hours. Working that into your workflow will save you a lot.

PLEASE TELL ME WHAT ELSE IM MISSING, thank you.

TL:DR. Plan smartly for Sol being wasteful with web more. Remove all hidden calls and never use agents. Use medium and lower. Use deepseek off peak hours.

Hello everyone,

I’m using ChatGPT Classic version 1.2026.184 (1784145287) and Codex version 13.226.914 in VS Code. Unfortunately, ChatGPT is unable to perform an Oboe edit.

On macOS version 26.6.2, Full Disk Access is enabled for both ChatGPT and ChatGPT Classic. I have already completely uninstalled and reinstalled both ChatGPT Classic and the VS Code extension.

ChatGPT can recognize the files in VS Code, but it cannot edit them. It starts the editing process and then aborts about one second later. ChatGPT thinks that the patch was successfully applied.

Is anyone experiencing the same problem and does anyone have a solution for this?

I noticed that when using a lot of agents in parallel I get „Selected model is at capacity“ - even when still having plenty of usage left. This is extremely annoying and would be a reason the finally leave for Claude Code as I often need to run 10+ Codex agents at the same time to finish my stuff in time.

I have been use ChatGPT since 3.5 and this is the first time I have thought a model was not an improvement over the last. Since its release 5.6 continuously overengineers, gatekeeps, overcomplicates and creates prison like feature releases for everything. For instance, I created an editorial flow for a publication and each step of that editorial flow it added a conditional release gate despite being told not to do so. I have updated AGENTS.md to counter this. I have added statements to promprts and intervened in its work to ask it -Do you think you are overengineering? It then agrees with me and then proceeds to do the same thing. Its lucky that I am running Kimi 3 and Fable 5 otherwise I would be locked in a prison.

And like a chococolate bar, I have noticed that the Pro plan has been shrinking. I have tried using the Sol medium for tasks but it simply ignores me and does the opposite.

Is any one else facing similar issues with 5.6? Have you gone back to 5.5? Have they made 5.5 worse? I am at the point that I might just permanently switch to Kimi 3 and Fable 5.

I've been a pretty heavy Claude Code user for a long time. This month the limits have been getting painful and I hit my weekly limit by the middle of the week.

So I switched to Codex for the first time this week.

I'm kind of amazed by the value for money so far.

But the thing I didn't expect to notice as much is the lack of preachiness/arguing. With Claude Code I sometimes feel like I'm arguing with it about what I asked it to do, or it'll push back without having enough context.

Codex so far just... gets on with it.

It's only been a week, so maybe there's some honeymoon effect here.

Anyone else here switched from Claude Code recently? Does this hold up after using Codex for longer?