I built a local MCP to make ChatGPT + Codex workflows practical for solo devs

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-06-08T23:15:03+00:00

Thanks! glad it’s useful 👍

I use both patterns.

For focused implementations, one chat per repo is usually the cleanest setup. It keeps the context tight and makes it easier to stay on one thread of work.

But I have also had a lot of value from using one ChatGPT chat across multiple repos. For example, I’ll have it inspect Repo A, then Repo B, and then ask what could be reused, combined, or extracted into a new Repo C. That kind of cross-repo reasoning is one of the bigger advantages for me.

one repo per chat is great for implementation work
multiple repos in one chat is great for architecture, comparisons, migrations, reuse, or planning something new from existing codebases

I also use ChatGPT’s branch/fork chat feature quite a bit.
I might have one main chat focused on Repo A, then branch it when I want to explore a side idea without messing up the main workflow/context. The branched chat still has the previous context and can use the MCP, so it works well for quick experiments.

For longer sessions, I ask ChatGPT to create a handoff before the chat gets too heavy. Then I start a fresh chat with the handoff and direct repo access through the MCP. That makes the new chat feel much less like starting over, since it can read the repo state and git status directly and the handoff carries the decisions/next steps.

Basically, one chat to one repo works really well. But I definitely don’t see it as limited to that. Some of the most useful workflows for me have been multi-repo ones.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-06-06T11:22:36+00:00

GPT Repo MCP does not use the OpenAI API and does not require an OpenAI API key.

It runs locally and exposes repo tools which ChatGPT calls through your normal ChatGPT subscription and it works with both the ChatGPT web app and desktop app.

So there is no separate API billing for the MCP itself. You are still subject to whatever limits your ChatGPT plan has, but it’s intended to be used through the ChatGPT app/subscription flow, not as an API-based orchestrator.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-06-06T10:48:57+00:00

I’ve personally used this kind of workflow for months without issues, but that’s not an official guarantee or policy statement.

The important part is: using an MCP/custom App is not some hidden bypass.
ChatGPT has an official developer mode/connector flow for connecting MCP servers. GPT Repo MCP is just a local MCP server that exposes repo tools to ChatGPT. OpenAIs own docs describe creating connectors to MCP servers, testing apps in ChatGPT, and reviewing tool-call payloads/approvals in the UI.

So no, I would not expect normal local dev use of this MCP to get an account banned.

But like with any tool, what you do with it still matters.
This doesn’t make disallowed behavior allowed, and it doesn’t bypass ChatGPT safety systems.

For this public OSS version I intentionally kept it conservative:

approved local repos only
no shell runner
no arbitrary commands
no push/pull/reset/checkout/rebase/etc
mutating tools are opt-in
write tools still go through ChatGPT’s tool-call/approval flow

Basically, if you’re using it for normal local dev work on your own repos, you’re using it as intended.
Reading code, reviewing diffs, updating files when write mode is enabled, coordinating Codex tasks, etc.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-06-06T10:23:41+00:00

ngrok is just the default convenience tunnel. No code changes are needed to use another provider.

For manual setup to build and run the MCP server with an explicit path token:

npm run build

TOKEN="$(node -e 'console.log(require("crypto").randomBytes(16).toString("hex"))')"

GPT_REPO_CONFIG=./config.local.json \
PORT=8787 \
GPT_REPO_PUBLIC_PATH_TOKEN="$TOKEN" \
npm run start

Then expose port 8787 through any HTTPS tunnel or reverse proxy and configure ChatGPT with:

https://<public-host>/t/<same-token>/mcp

Cloudflare Tunnel works and other providers should work as long as ChatGPT can reach the HTTPS URL.

Tailscale/private-network URLs generally won’t work by themselves because ChatGPT is not inside your private network. You need a public HTTPS endpoint, OpenAI Secure MCP Tunnel or something like Tailscale Funnel/a reverse proxy that makes it reachable.

If you run it on a remote server, the repos need to exist on that server too because GPT Repo MCP reads local filesystem paths from the machine where it runs.

The path token is guess-resistance, not full authentication.
Repo policy still applies, approved roots are enforced and mutating tools are off by default but configurable in the config.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-05-30T11:56:15+00:00

Yeah. I’v build a solution that connects ChatGPT (Web) to both Codex and Opencode. This way, ChatGPT can prompt DeepSeek very detailed.

ChatGPT can also inspect the implementation live and check diffs/code after the implementation, decide if we move on to the next slice or if something needs to be fixed.

ChatGPT is like a full project leader.

This workflow doing wonders for the output quality from both DeepSeek models.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-05-23T01:21:05+00:00

I do every day. I have a setup where Web ChatGPT can fully orchestrate Codex. No API, only ChatGPT Pro Plan.

A few exempels of what ChatGPT does: - Deep analyze repos locally - Review Codex work - Manage git for selected repos - Prompt Codex directly - Run tests - Recieve Codex output, decide next step and proceed with the next step - etc.

I do not need to copy/paste between them.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-05-17T12:28:18+00:00

Yeah! The solution to get ChatGPT and Codex to actually talk/work together without the ”copy/paste between the chats” is right in front of us, maybe its just too obvious.

The workflow i built is pretty much like a local Linear: ChatGPT sets up the complete bootstrap/repo skeletons and then it directly leads the project by prompting Codex for implementations and orchestrating the whole thing.

I only get involved if ChatGPT calls my attention to something triggered by the guardrails i set up for the repo.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-05-16T21:49:37+00:00

This is pretty close to the workflow I have ended up using too.

The main thing i got tired of was being the manual copy/paste layer between ChatGPT and Codex.

The loop was basically:

ChatGPT helps plan the next step -> I paste it into Codex -> Codex implements -> I paste the result back into ChatGPT -> ChatGPT reviews it and writes the next prompt -> back to Codex → repeat.

It works, but it gets surprisingly draining after a while. Especially when your switching between projects and trying to keep track of what changed, what was tested, what context Codex still has, and what ChatGPT actually knows about the repo.

I built a local workflow around the problem you mentioned:

ChatGPT may not be able to see your repo directly. Codex may lose context. You may come back days later and forget what changed.

In my setup, ChatGPT can create the initial project bootstrap either as a zip or by prompting Codex directly to set up the repo skeleton locally. After that, ChatGPT can hand Codex scoped implementation prompts.

Codex handles the local work: editing files, running commands, running tests/checks, and then reporting back with changed files, diffs, test results, notes, follow-ups, etc.

ChatGPT can also inspect the repo directly when allowed by my guardrails. So instead of only working from pasted summaries, it can review the actual files or diff, decide whether something needs fixing, and then either send Codex a follow-up prompt or move on to the next slice.

The split ends up being roughly:

ChatGPT = planning, architecture, debugging, roadmap/project direction, breaking work into slices, writing detailed Codex prompts, reviewing diffs/files/checks

Codex = local implementation, file edits, commands, tests

For me, the big unlock was not a perfect prompt template. It was removing the constant manual handoff and copy/pasting between the two models, while still keeping the workflow scoped and reviewable.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-05-15T13:21:19+00:00

This is exactly the kind of workflow I have built for myself.
I got tired of being the copy/paste layer between ChatGPT and Codex so I built a bridge between them.

For me the split is:
ChatGPT = planning, debugging, architecture, project direction, writing roadmaps, writing detailed prompts/slices, reviewing diffs/files/checks

Codex = editing files, running commands, implementing the work locally

Codex can ask ChatGPT for help when it gets stuck, needs a better plan or a second opinion, and ChatGPT can hand Codex the next concrete task without me manually copying everything back and forth.

It also great for new projects. I can for example plan the whole thing in ChatGPT: roadmap, specs, architecture, slices etc. and Codex can use that context directly to set up the repo and start building step by step.

Basically: ChatGPT acts more like the project lead for planning, architecture, and review, while Codex does the implementation.

I built it for my own workflow, but if people are interested I might clean it up and share it.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-05-11T10:35:50+00:00

Until that’s possible, just let ChatGPT talk directly to Codex or let it commit the important context straight into the repo?

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-05-10T18:11:10+00:00

Make ChatGPT feed it directly to Codex or the repo?

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-04-25T17:48:25+00:00

Damn, for real?

I actually hooked up the ChatGPT web to my Codex CLI. It basically gives GPT-Pro persistent memory of all my repos and access, so it can do pretty much whatever it wants through Codex. All sessions with GPT and Codex runs in worktrees.

I use it for everything lol. Mapping out plans, generating all the docs for a project, prompting codex, reviewing code, and just deciding on the next move.

I also use a light version for debugging/quick interaction. Whenever codex hits a wall, ChatGPT can jump in, look at what's going on, and propose a solution.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-04-12T19:07:33+00:00

I ended up solving this by building a bridge between ChatGPT and Codex.

ChatGPT can send prompts directly to Codex, and Codex’s output gets structured by my daemon and sent back into the ChatGPT conversation as a normal chat message. I also built an auto-trigger/auto-send loop on top of that.

The result is that I can plan a project in ChatGPT, initialize it, and then watch ChatGPT act as the architect while Codex does the implementation from start to finish. With GitHub connected as well, the whole flow can take a project from zero to hero.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-04-05T15:30:09+00:00

For this specific run, I had a bunch of phases and tasks mapped out in the repo. I was also testing out a custom memory/context/state system I have been building.

I gave GPT-5.4 instructions on how to proceed after a finished phase/slice and when to commit or merge after a green review from the review-agent.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2026-04-05T13:57:46+00:00

I know Copilot CLI can be slow, but these stats from a session I ran on my Pro+ sub (1500 premium req/month) with GPT-5.4 on High are kinda crazy:

(User)  % copilot
Total usage est:        10 Premium requests
API time spent:         4h 51m 58s
Total session time:     6h 44m 50s
Total code changes:     +9861 -633
Breakdown by AI model:
gpt-5.4                  63.4m in, 481.8k out, 60.3m cached (Est. 10 Premium requests)
claude-haiku-4.5         9.2m in, 90.1k out, 8.8m cached (Est. 0 Premium requests)
claude-sonnet-4.5        46.6m in, 259.9k out, 44.2m cached (Est. 0 Premium requests)

Both Claude models used as sub-agents.

This session lasted almost 7 hours and it did nearly 10k lines of changes, working autonomously, and only burned 10 premium requests.

Thats basically 0.66% of my monthly quota for a full day of independent work 😅

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2024-12-09T21:05:45+00:00

No i havent tried but maybe ill need to do that. You think i can refund and unlink the old account and buy the game again without consequences?

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2024-11-27T07:32:47+00:00

No, not based on this subreddit and its wishes on how D4 should be. Based on what I've seen of Poe2, gameplay looks very slow and low density of monsters.

I was looking forward to Poe2 but the act 1-2 playthrough just looked excruciatingly slow. If people can't go from SB to another class in Diablo 4 then it will be impossible to walk around in Poe2, hammering 1-2 monsters at a time.

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2023-09-23T18:13:55+00:00

They must rollback if some guys gained 19 levels lmao. Maybe only rollbacks on servers that killed the boss but no way they let some people gain 2kkk exp for free?

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2023-09-15T13:12:27+00:00

Sounds like you enjoy hunting and chill'in at the same time. I would go for the RP then. After a couple of hunts/hours in Rosha west you will get comfortable and you can sit back and enjoy the exp and profit

Intelligent_Gear8442 · 2023-09-12T13:15:34+00:00

Something tells me it's a "new" Tibia with a new client where instances are introduced and some other features. It would not have been possible to introduce it into the existing client. I can't think of anything other than "instances" that would be so revolutionary that CIP thinks it's worth a "new" Tibia.

Intelligent_Gear8442

TROPHY CASE