<< All versions
Skill v1.0.2
currentLLM-judged scan95/100wshobson/agents/multi-reviewer-patterns
4 files
──Details
PublishedJune 20, 2026 at 08:06 PM
Content Hashsha256:30a8e067af085d6d...
Git SHAcc37bfdd292c
Bump Typepatch
──Files
Files (1 file, 5.1 KB)
SKILL.md5.1 KBactive
SKILL.md · 128 lines · 5.1 KB
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
Multi-Reviewer Patterns
Patterns for coordinating parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions, deduplicating findings, calibrating severity, and producing consolidated reports.
When to Use This Skill
- Organizing a multi-dimensional code review
- Deciding which review dimensions to assign
- Deduplicating findings from multiple reviewers
- Calibrating severity ratings consistently
- Producing a consolidated review report
Review Dimension Allocation
Available Dimensions
| Dimension | Focus | When to Include | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Security | Vulnerabilities, auth, input validation | Always for code handling user input or auth | |
| Performance | Query efficiency, memory, caching | When changing data access or hot paths | |
| Architecture | SOLID, coupling, patterns | For structural changes or new modules | |
| Testing | Coverage, quality, edge cases | When adding new functionality | |
| Accessibility | WCAG, ARIA, keyboard nav | For UI/frontend changes |
Recommended Combinations
| Scenario | Dimensions | |
|---|---|---|
| API endpoint changes | Security, Performance, Architecture | |
| Frontend component | Architecture, Testing, Accessibility | |
| Database migration | Performance, Architecture | |
| Authentication changes | Security, Testing | |
| Full feature review | Security, Performance, Architecture, Testing |
Finding Deduplication
When multiple reviewers report issues at the same location:
Merge Rules
- Same file:line, same issue — Merge into one finding, credit all reviewers
- Same file:line, different issues — Keep as separate findings
- Same issue, different locations — Keep separate but cross-reference
- Conflicting severity — Use the higher severity rating
- Conflicting recommendations — Include both with reviewer attribution
Deduplication Process
For each finding in all reviewer reports:1. Check if another finding references the same file:line2. If yes, check if they describe the same issue3. If same issue: merge, keeping the more detailed description4. If different issue: keep both, tag as "co-located"5. Use highest severity among merged findings
Severity Calibration
Severity Criteria
| Severity | Impact | Likelihood | Examples | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Critical | Data loss, security breach, complete failure | Certain or very likely | SQL injection, auth bypass, data corruption | |
| High | Significant functionality impact, degradation | Likely | Memory leak, missing validation, broken flow | |
| Medium | Partial impact, workaround exists | Possible | N+1 query, missing edge case, unclear error | |
| Low | Minimal impact, cosmetic | Unlikely | Style issue, minor optimization, naming |
Calibration Rules
- Security vulnerabilities exploitable by external users: always Critical or High
- Performance issues in hot paths: at least Medium
- Missing tests for critical paths: at least Medium
- Accessibility violations for core functionality: at least Medium
- Code style issues with no functional impact: Low
Consolidated Report Template
markdown
## Code Review Report**Target**: {files/PR/directory}**Reviewers**: {dimension-1}, {dimension-2}, {dimension-3}**Date**: {date}**Files Reviewed**: {count}### Critical Findings ({count})#### [CR-001] {Title}**Location**: `{file}:{line}`**Dimension**: {Security/Performance/etc.}**Description**: {what was found}**Impact**: {what could happen}**Fix**: {recommended remediation}### High Findings ({count})...### Medium Findings ({count})...### Low Findings ({count})...### Summary| Dimension | Critical | High | Medium | Low | Total || ------------ | -------- | ----- | ------ | ----- | ------ || Security | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 6 || Performance | 0 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 7 || Architecture | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5 || **Total** | **1** | **3** | **9** | **5** | **18** |### Recommendation{Overall assessment and prioritized action items}