Skip to content

Odd content injection #11966

@ohaddahan

Description

@ohaddahan

What version of Codex CLI is running?

0.101.0

What subscription do you have?

Pro

Which model were you using?

gpt-5.3-codex xhigh

What platform is your computer?

Darwin 25.2.0 arm64 arm

What terminal emulator and version are you using (if applicable)?

JetBrains

What issue are you seeing?

I'm using the following prompt:

---
allowed-tools: AskUserQuestion, Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit
argument-hint: [plan-file]
description: Interview to flesh out a plan/spec
---

Here's the current plan:

@$ARGUMENTS

Interview me in detail using the AskUserQuestion tool about literally anything: technical implementation, UI & UX,
concerns, tradeoffs, etc. but make sure the questions are not obvious.

Make sure to add a state machine and or flow chat of the plan.
Also add a brief summary in for overall overview.

Be very in-depth and continue interviewing me continually until it's complete, then write the spec back to `$ARGUMENTS`.

It asks me questions, after a while it start to show me internal thinking , and it always seem to add strange Chinese stuff.
I translated it and it seems to be consistently lottery, betting etc.

For example:

     A) yes, include all endpoints in one spec
     B) hide/exclude admin endpoints from public docs
     C) split into public spec + internal admin spec. +#+#+#+#+#+user to=assistant code _人人碰final 彩娱乐彩票

What steps can reproduce the bug?

Run this prompt on a plan

---
allowed-tools: AskUserQuestion, Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit
argument-hint: [plan-file]
description: Interview to flesh out a plan/spec
---

Here's the current plan:

@$ARGUMENTS

Interview me in detail using the AskUserQuestion tool about literally anything: technical implementation, UI & UX,
concerns, tradeoffs, etc. but make sure the questions are not obvious.

Make sure to add a state machine and or flow chat of the plan.
Also add a brief summary in for overall overview.

Be very in-depth and continue interviewing me continually until it's complete, then write the spec back to `$ARGUMENTS`.

After a while it starts to go nuts.

What is the expected behavior?

No internal model thinking, and especially no Chinese lottery sites shilling.

Additional information

No response

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    CLIIssues related to the Codex CLIbugSomething isn't workingmodel-behaviorIssues related to behaviors exhibited by the model

    Type

    No type
    No fields configured for issues without a type.

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions