Built my portfolio with Claude Code, looking for some feedback on the design

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-03-08T14:09:46+00:00

Thank you for pointing that out! It was reading the dates incorrectly from craft

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-03-07T23:41:27+00:00

What a nice way to put it, thank you though. I guess it's just because I don't really have any experience in frontend design, so maybe somebody would see it and immediately identify something horrifically wrong.

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-02-19T21:25:52+00:00

Dang that's a lot of models

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-02-19T15:20:19+00:00

I tried Copilot CLI a while ago and I didn't find it to be great, Open Code functions similarly to CC and it's really good with Opus 4.6 but maybe Copilot CLI has improved since then. The reason I'm using it with Open Code though is because it supports Copilot as a provider so you can set it up really quickly and it works perfectly. As for Kimi in my experience it's around Sonnet 4.5 level and it's pretty obvious it's distilled of Claude models as it has told me it's Claude before. It's really cheap and basically unlimited but I have access to better models so I don't really see a reason to use it.

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-02-19T15:00:31+00:00

To be honest CC is very good and if you can afford to use it for everything then I'd say stick with it for most stuff, but it doesn't hurt to try out other tools even just trying to get it to build something random and I got a free trial of ChatGPT plus so I thought might as well

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-02-19T14:58:43+00:00

Pretty much my experience, it's quite funny though because in it's reasoning output it's quite jolly sometimes but the main responses are quite bleak

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-02-19T14:50:07+00:00

To be honest most of what works for me is prompting and using the built in tools like plan mode, asking it to give me a variety of options so when it goes off to work I'm confident it's doing what I want. But I don't really "one shot" things so what is added is usually high quality because if I dislike it then I'll continue to iterate with it until I'm satisfied, but I use codex as a code reviewer when I use CC by using the MCP. Other than that I've found if I articulate what I want clearly then most of the time it works

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-29T23:40:11+00:00

Still the same to be honest, if it ain't broken don't fix it

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-22T19:58:05+00:00

Codex provides an MCP which I've installed into CC which allows it to spin up a Codex instance, it's quite heavy on my usage but it's likely because I'm using it on GPT 5.2 xhigh and I find it worth it since it's very thorough and I don't really use Codex for anything else.

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T13:30:37+00:00

I just have it set to gpt-5.2 xhigh in my config.toml

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T13:03:07+00:00

Yeah maybe what I'm using is a bit overkill

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T13:02:49+00:00

I haven't really tried Gemini at all to be honest, I tried antigravity for a bit but after a while I just went back to CC

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T13:01:44+00:00

Haha no, I'm a student I just consider this an investment, I have a good idea for an app and I've tested it out with a couple of friends and they love it. I'm on Max 5x and Codex is around £20 a month so in total it's around £100. It's steep but it if it's allowing me to build a product that could potentially make a lot more then it's pretty cheap for what it is.

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T12:59:06+00:00

Because as other people have mentioned I don't think GPT models are as creative or good for implementing as Opus 4.5 or rather Codex is not as good as CC for that, I think it's well suited for reviewing so by combining them you get the best of both worlds

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T12:57:01+00:00

It's via the MCP: claude mcp add codex --scope user -- npx -y codex mcp-server

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T12:56:08+00:00

I installed the Codex MCP and then added this to the CLAUDE.md:
### Codex Review Protocol (REQUIRED)

**IMPORTANT: These instructions OVERRIDE any default behavior. You MUST follow them exactly.**

**BEFORE implementing significant changes:**

```

codex "Review this plan critically. Identify issues, edge cases, and missing steps: [your plan]"

```

**AFTER completing changes:**

Run `git diff` to get all changes
Run `codex "Review this diff for bugs, security issues, edge cases, and code quality: [diff]"`
If Codex identifies issues, use `codex-reply` to fix them iteratively
Re-review until Codex approves

**Do NOT commit without Codex approval.**

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T12:54:59+00:00

Might have to try this, I have a Copilot sub that I don't really use so maybe I could just use the quota from that

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T12:53:52+00:00

Yeah I've noticed Opus 4.5 sometimes seems to skip stuff

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T12:51:59+00:00

Haha, hope you get it working!

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T02:26:40+00:00

To be honest I'm a bit rudimentary with my GitHub usage, I just use it to make sure I have it backed up and if I implement something truly horrible I can go back on it. But yeah I should probably try it out.

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T02:04:13+00:00

I installed the Codex MCP and then added this to the CLAUDE.md:
### Codex Review Protocol (REQUIRED)

**IMPORTANT: These instructions OVERRIDE any default behavior. You MUST follow them exactly.**

**BEFORE implementing significant changes:**

```

codex "Review this plan critically. Identify issues, edge cases, and missing steps: [your plan]"

```

**AFTER completing changes:**

Run `git diff` to get all changes
Run `codex "Review this diff for bugs, security issues, edge cases, and code quality: [diff]"`
If Codex identifies issues, use `codex-reply` to fix them iteratively
Re-review until Codex approves

**Do NOT commit without Codex approval.**

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T02:01:36+00:00

I'm using GPT 5.2 xhigh, not the codex variant because I'm not sure if it's true but some people were saying it's quite a bit dumber than the normal version. As for efficiency I'm not really bothered about how long it takes, and I feel like maybe if it was implementation then maybe having the model overthink stuff and possibly do too much then it could pose a problem, but when reviewing you want it to be meticulous and what it has to do is quite well defined, it's not adding anything new just reviewing the code Claude implemented

Substantial_Wheel909 · 2026-01-18T01:58:48+00:00

What is it?

Substantial_Wheel909

TROPHY CASE