Codex or Claude Code: what makes you switch mid-task?

An agent is fixing a bug and starts touching files outside the requested scope. Before switching tools, I'd check whether the task has a reproducible failure and a clear boundary. Without those, the next agent gets the same ambiguity.

If the task is well defined, I'd give Codex and Claude Code the same starting commit and stop at the first reviewable diff. I'd compare unrelated edits, tests actually run, and the human work needed before merge. A passing test alone misses that cost.

If you've switched mid-task, what triggered it? Did the second tool make the patch easier to review, or did you mostly improve the brief on the second try?