Codex refuses mentions of --no-verify even when non-executing

Open 💬 4 comments Opened Feb 3, 2026 by bniladridas
💡 Likely answer: A maintainer (github-actions[bot], contributor) responded on this thread — see the highlighted reply below.

Description

Codex appears to treat the use or mention of On branch webview-fix
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/webview-fix'.

nothing to commit, working tree clean as a hard policy circumvention,
even when the context is explanatory or non-executing.

In my case, Codex refused with language implying it must "follow repo rules" and cannot use ,
despite the request not being about bypassing contributor policy, CI, or enforcement — only local git hooks.

Why this is an issue

  • disables local hooks, not repository or CI enforcement
  • Developers commonly use it for benign reasons (broken hooks, WIP commits, investigation)
  • The current behavior feels like a false positive refusal driven by over-broad interpretation

Expected behavior

Codex should be able to:

  • Discuss or explain without refusing
  • Distinguish local workflow flags from actual policy violations
  • Optionally ask for clarification instead of hard refusal

Actual behavior

Codex refuses outright, framing the request as violating repository rules.

Impact

This creates unnecessary friction and makes Codex feel more like a compliance gate than a developer assistant.

View original on GitHub ↗

4 Comments

github-actions[bot] contributor · 6 months ago

Potential duplicates detected. Please review them and close your issue if it is a duplicate.

  • #8313

Powered by Codex Action

bniladridas · 6 months ago

I reviewed #8313 (flagged as a possible duplicate). It’s closed and only contains a reference to an uploaded thread with no details. This issue includes specific context and expected/actual behavior around , so it doesn’t look like a direct duplicate.

bniladridas · 6 months ago
Additional context (for reference) At the time of creating this issue, I was working in a repository that includes an AGENTS.md with explicit agent rules, including a prohibition on using --no-verify. The request in this case was explanatory rather than instructive, but it appears the agent treated the mention itself as a hard violation derived from these rules. For clarity and reproducibility, here is the relevant file: https://github.com/bniladridas/browser/blob/main/AGENTS.md
bniladridas · 6 months ago

@etraut-openai — adding a bit more context here. This appeared related to how Codex interprets strict AGENTS.md rules as hard constraints even when the request was explanatory.