codex-app-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| CODEX_BIN | No | Path to a specific codex binary. If not set, the server spawns 'codex' from PATH. |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| codexB | Runs a prompt against Codex over a long-lived |
| codex-replyA | Continues an existing Codex thread started by |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct roles: codex starts a new thread, while codex-reply continues an existing thread using a threadId. There is no meaningful overlap or ambiguity between them.
Both names share a consistent codex prefix and the -reply suffix clearly marks the continuation operation. The naming is not a strict verb_noun convention, but the pattern is predictable and understandable.
With only two tools, the server feels minimal, but this is arguably appropriate for a narrow conversation-thread workflow. It falls into the borderline range where the count is thin but not unreasonable.
The server covers the core lifecycle of Codex interactions: starting a new thread and continuing an existing one. There are minor gaps such as no explicit session listing or cancellation, but agents can work around them using the returned thread IDs.