Multi Reviewer Patterns
Unverified●31/40Claude Code◐PartialHas SKILL.md but declares no allowed-tools — Claude Code will ask for permission each time
Cursor◐PartialPlain prose you can paste in — but no Cursor rules file
Codex◐PartialPlain prose you can paste in — but no AGENTS.md
Gemini CLI◐PartialPlain prose you can paste in
Copilot◐PartialPlain prose you can paste in — but no Copilot instructions file
npx agentalley add multi-reviewer-patternsWho is stuck, and on what
Coordinate parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions with finding deduplication, severity calibration, and consolidated reporting. Use this skill when organizing multi-reviewer code reviews, calibrating finding severity, or consolidating review results.
The whole source
Frontmatter — 3 properties
| name | multi-reviewer-patterns |
|---|---|
| description | Coordinate parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions with finding deduplication, severity calibration, and consolidated reporting. Use this skill when organizing multi-reviewer code reviews, calibrating finding severity, or consolidating review results. |
| version | 1.0.2 |
| 1 | --- |
| 2 | name: multi-reviewer-patterns |
| 3 | description: Coordinate parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions with finding deduplication, severity calibration, and consolidated reporting. Use this skill when organizing multi-reviewer code reviews, calibrating finding severity, or consolidating review results. |
| 4 | version: 1.0.2 |
| 5 | ---A5 — No allowed-tools declared — no way to tell what this skill may touch |
| 6 | |
| 7 | # Multi-Reviewer Patterns |
| 8 | |
| 9 | Patterns for coordinating parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions, deduplicating findings, calibrating severity, and producing consolidated reports. |
| 10 | |
| 11 | ## When to Use This Skill |
| 12 | |
| 13 | - Organizing a multi-dimensional code review |
| 14 | - Deciding which review dimensions to assign |
| 15 | - Deduplicating findings from multiple reviewers |
| 16 | - Calibrating severity ratings consistently |
| 17 | - Producing a consolidated review report |
| 18 | |
| 19 | ## Review Dimension Allocation |
| 20 | |
| 21 | ### Available Dimensions |
| 22 | |
| 23 | | Dimension | Focus | When to Include | |
| 24 | | ----------------- | --------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- | |
| 25 | | **Security** | Vulnerabilities, auth, input validation | Always for code handling user input or auth | |
| 26 | | **Performance** | Query efficiency, memory, caching | When changing data access or hot paths | |
| 27 | | **Architecture** | SOLID, coupling, patterns | For structural changes or new modules | |
| 28 | | **Testing** | Coverage, quality, edge cases | When adding new functionality | |
| 29 | | **Accessibility** | WCAG, ARIA, keyboard nav | For UI/frontend changes | |
| 30 | |
| 31 | ### Recommended Combinations |
| 32 | |
| 33 | | Scenario | Dimensions | |
| 34 | | ---------------------- | -------------------------------------------- | |
| 35 | | API endpoint changes | Security, Performance, Architecture | |
| 36 | | Frontend component | Architecture, Testing, Accessibility | |
| 37 | | Database migration | Performance, Architecture | |
| 38 | | Authentication changes | Security, Testing | |
| 39 | | Full feature review | Security, Performance, Architecture, Testing | |
| 40 | |
| 41 | ## Finding Deduplication |
| 42 | |
| 43 | When multiple reviewers report issues at the same location: |
| 44 | |
| 45 | ### Merge Rules |
| 46 | |
| 47 | 1. **Same file:line, same issue** — Merge into one finding, credit all reviewers |
| 48 | 2. **Same file:line, different issues** — Keep as separate findings |
| 49 | 3. **Same issue, different locations** — Keep separate but cross-reference |
| 50 | 4. **Conflicting severity** — Use the higher severity rating |
| 51 | 5. **Conflicting recommendations** — Include both with reviewer attribution |
| 52 | |
| 53 | ### Deduplication Process |
| 54 | |
| 55 | ``` |
| 56 | For each finding in all reviewer reports: |
| 57 | 1. Check if another finding references the same file:line |
| 58 | 2. If yes, check if they describe the same issue |
| 59 | 3. If same issue: merge, keeping the more detailed description |
| 60 | 4. If different issue: keep both, tag as "co-located" |
| 61 | 5. Use highest severity among merged findings |
| 62 | ``` |
| 63 | |
| 64 | ## Severity Calibration |
| 65 | |
| 66 | ### Severity Criteria |
| 67 | |
| 68 | | Severity | Impact | Likelihood | Examples | |
| 69 | | ------------ | --------------------------------------------- | ---------------------- | -------------------------------------------- | |
| 70 | | **Critical** | Data loss, security breach, complete failure | Certain or very likely | SQL injection, auth bypass, data corruption | |
| 71 | | **High** | Significant functionality impact, degradation | Likely | Memory leak, missing validation, broken flow | |
| 72 | | **Medium** | Partial impact, workaround exists | Possible | N+1 query, missing edge case, unclear error | |
| 73 | | **Low** | Minimal impact, cosmetic | Unlikely | Style issue, minor optimization, naming | |
| 74 | |
| 75 | ### Calibration Rules |
| 76 | |
| 77 | - Security vulnerabilities exploitable by external users: always Critical or High |
| 78 | - Performance issues in hot paths: at least Medium |
| 79 | - Missing tests for critical paths: at least Medium |
| 80 | - Accessibility violations for core functionality: at least Medium |
| 81 | - Code style issues with no functional impact: Low |
| 82 | |
| 83 | ## Consolidated Report Template |
| 84 | |
| 85 | ```markdown |
| 86 | ## Code Review Report |
| 87 | |
| 88 | **Target**: {files/PR/directory} |
| 89 | **Reviewers**: {dimension-1}, {dimension-2}, {dimension-3} |
| 90 | **Date**: {date} |
| 91 | **Files Reviewed**: {count} |
| 92 | |
| 93 | ### Critical Findings ({count}) |
| 94 | |
| 95 | #### [CR-001] {Title} |
| 96 | |
| 97 | **Location**: `{file}:{line}` |
| 98 | **Dimension**: {Security/Performance/etc.} |
| 99 | **Description**: {what was found} |
| 100 | **Impact**: {what could happen} |
| 101 | **Fix**: {recommended remediation} |
| 102 | |
| 103 | ### High Findings ({count}) |
| 104 | |
| 105 | ... |
| 106 | |
| 107 | ### Medium Findings ({count}) |
| 108 | |
| 109 | ... |
| 110 | |
| 111 | ### Low Findings ({count}) |
| 112 | |
| 113 | ... |
| 114 | |
| 115 | ### Summary |
| 116 | |
| 117 | | Dimension | Critical | High | Medium | Low | Total | |
| 118 | | ------------ | -------- | ----- | ------ | ----- | ------ | |
| 119 | | Security | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 6 | |
| 120 | | Performance | 0 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 7 | |
| 121 | | Architecture | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5 | |
| 122 | | **Total** | **1** | **3** | **9** | **5** | **18** | |
| 123 | |
| 124 | ### Recommendation |
| 125 | |
| 126 | {Overall assessment and prioritized action items} |
| 127 | ``` |
| 128 |
Reviews
Installed this one?Write the first review and take the Trailblazer badge.
Alternatives
Task Coordination StrategiesDecompose complex tasks, design dependency graphs, and coordinate multi-agent work with proper task descriptions and workload balancing. Use this skill when breaking down work for agent teams, managing task dependencies, or monitoring team progress.◐◐◐◐◐●35/40Ebay Seller Tools·····●34/40Tough Decision Advisor: Every Angle ConsideredHand in a decision you're stuck on. Get back a clear breakdown of every angle — the trade-offs, the risks, the blind spot, and a recommended path.●····●32/40DHDNA Profiler — Cognitive Pattern ExtractionPaste any email, proposal, or note someone wrote, and get back a plain-language read on how they think, what drives their decisions, and how they communicate.●····●32/40