Research investigation R0920 / claim audit
Can Codex Hook Policies See the Tool Calls They Claim to Govern?
The checked source supports a bounded finding: hooks cover most enumerated static built-in handler types, but selective exclusions and hosted paths mean they are not a complete action-governance boundary.
Snapshot only. There is not enough history to claim a trend yet.
Version ledger
Frozen public editions
Each edition preserves the records, method, sources, and downloads available at publication time.
The matrix is a handler-type capability audit, not a measure of tools enabled in one deployment, successful hook execution in every product surface, or end-to-end policy effectiveness. V1 and V2 agent handlers are mutually exclusive at runtime.
- Dataset ID
- spd:can-codex-hook-policies-see-the-tool-calls-they-claim-to-govern-8a8262f1
- Stable URL
- /research/can-codex-hook-policies-see-the-tool-calls-they-claim-to-govern-8a8262f1
- Version
- v1
- Coverage
- 2026-09-20
- Records
- 4
- Fields
- 7
- Updated
Measurement technique
How to read this report
- 01Evidence matrix plan: use the source-defined inventory of static built-in CoreToolRuntime handler types as the denominator; exclude external MCP tools, dynamic tools, extension tools, and hosted WebSearch specifications.
- 02Classify each handler by source-level capability to emit PreToolUse, emit PostToolUse, and accept pre-hook argument rewriting.
- 03Separate local registry-dispatched function tools from specialized control surfaces and hosted tool specifications.
- 04Preserve the September 20, 2026 cutoff and treat the recovered main-branch snapshot as a bounded source review, not a new collection or execution.
- 05Compare the implementation boundary with official hooks documentation, while keeping Desktop- or plugin-owned paths distinct from registry-path capability.
Sources
Evidence
2 publishers supporting 4 records. Expand a publisher to inspect its cited pages.