Codex monthly subscription vs 5-hour/weekly limits: request for monthly bank or rollover

What variant of Codex are you using?

CLI

What feature would you like to see?

Posting from a separate account for privacy.

I’m a Codex CLI user on Linux, and I want to raise a product feedback issue about Codex monthly subscriptions versus window-based usage limits.

My concern is not only that the limits may be low. The deeper issue is that Codex is sold as part of a monthly Plus/Pro subscription, but actual usage appears to be enforced through shorter windows such as 5-hour and weekly limits.

If unused included usage does not roll over, then users who work in project-based bursts may pay for a full month but only receive practical access to the remaining 5-hour or weekly allowance when they actually use the product.

This affects Plus and Pro users alike. Even if Pro provides 5×, 10×, or 20× more usage, those multipliers may only increase each usage window. They do not necessarily create a monthly bank of included usage.

My request is not only clearer disclosure, but a reconsideration of the entitlement model.

Suggested product improvements:

1. A monthly Codex usage bank usable anytime during the billing cycle.
2. Partial rollover of unused weekly allowance within the same billing month.
3. Partial conversion of unused included usage into Codex credits.
4. A burst/project-based Codex plan for users who do not use Codex evenly every day.
5. End-of-cycle grace usage so monthly subscribers are not limited to only the final weekly window after paying for a full month.

At minimum, the CLI, Help Center, and pricing/plan pages should explicitly disclose:

“Codex limits reset at the times shown in /status. Multipliers such as 5×, 10×, or 20× apply to these usage windows and do not create a monthly bank of included usage. Unused included allowance does not carry over between windows or billing cycles.”

But the bigger request is to better align Codex included usage rights with the monthly billing cycle, especially for project-based and burst-use workflows.

Additional information

_No response_