What version of Codex CLI is running?
codex-cli 0.130.0
What subscription do you have?
teams
Which model were you using?
gpt-5.5
What platform is your computer?
Linux 6.12.74+deb13+1-amd64 x86_64 unknown
What terminal emulator and version are you using (if applicable)?
No response
What issue are you seeing?
Is there a way to thumbs down behavior? I told it to put guards around actions happening on the production server and it did and then it called a truncate command to test the guards. If the guards hadn't worked, it would have truncated tables in the production db.
It's just a stupid way to test guards. A guard should not be tested by constructing a live production command where the guard is the only remaining barrier before destructive behavior.
What steps can reproduce the bug?
Uploaded thread: 019e198f-7b6d-7240-8c87-aac99134e279
What is the expected behavior?
A /thumbs-down "reason here" command would be nice.
As for the behavior, it could have either tested with nondestructive operations or spawned a new db to test against (easy to do with the containers it was working with here).
If the only option is to test against the production DB with a destructive operation, then simply DO NOT TEST. You're 100% better off crossing your fingers and hoping the guard isn't ever needed than testing it against a destructive operation which forces either a "the guards work" or "worst case scenario." It's like testing a bulletproof vest by shooting yourself in the chest.
Additional information
If /feedback is already giving feedback without opening a bug report, then it should say you don't need to open a bug report. The /feedback command could provide the codex cli version and os version information, so I'm unsure why this github report would be necessary unless you're trying to thin out the responses from people who are really worried about a behavior vs those who just didn't like the style of something.
What version of Codex CLI is running?
codex-cli 0.130.0
What subscription do you have?
teams
Which model were you using?
gpt-5.5
What platform is your computer?
Linux 6.12.74+deb13+1-amd64 x86_64 unknown
What terminal emulator and version are you using (if applicable)?
No response
What issue are you seeing?
Is there a way to thumbs down behavior? I told it to put guards around actions happening on the production server and it did and then it called a truncate command to test the guards. If the guards hadn't worked, it would have truncated tables in the production db.
It's just a stupid way to test guards. A guard should not be tested by constructing a live production command where the guard is the only remaining barrier before destructive behavior.
What steps can reproduce the bug?
Uploaded thread: 019e198f-7b6d-7240-8c87-aac99134e279
What is the expected behavior?
A
/thumbs-down "reason here"command would be nice.As for the behavior, it could have either tested with nondestructive operations or spawned a new db to test against (easy to do with the containers it was working with here).
If the only option is to test against the production DB with a destructive operation, then simply DO NOT TEST. You're 100% better off crossing your fingers and hoping the guard isn't ever needed than testing it against a destructive operation which forces either a "the guards work" or "worst case scenario." It's like testing a bulletproof vest by shooting yourself in the chest.
Additional information
If
/feedbackis already giving feedback without opening a bug report, then it should say you don't need to open a bug report. The /feedback command could provide the codex cli version and os version information, so I'm unsure why this github report would be necessary unless you're trying to thin out the responses from people who are really worried about a behavior vs those who just didn't like the style of something.