[codex] Add implementation review workflow

[defin85]

Summary

• add an optional review workflow exposed as /opsx:review and openspec-review-impl-vs-plan
• register the workflow in skill/command generation, profile selection, and profile drift detection
• document the command and update generated workflow lists/spec expectations

Why

/opsx:verify is useful for archive readiness, but mature brownfield projects often need a stricter read-only implementation review that traces plan items to actual code, default runtime wiring, tests, config, examples, and docs before accepting a change as implemented.

Validation

• pnpm exec vitest run test/core/profiles.test.ts test/core/shared/skill-generation.test.ts test/core/templates/skill-templates-parity.test.ts test/commands/config-profile.test.ts test/commands/config.test.ts
• pnpm run build
• pnpm run lint (passes with an existing warning in src/core/references.ts)
• node bin/openspec.js validate --specs --no-interactive

Generated with Codex using GPT-5.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 72cfc49e-f4e7-49ee-95d7-89f2276e2b01

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

• 🔍 Trigger review

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}