Agent skill

parallel-code-review

Orchestrate parallel code review using specialized reviewer agents. Spawns 5 reviewers in parallel, synthesizes findings, and presents for triage. Use when user wants comprehensive multi-agent code review.

View SKILL.md on GitHub Repository
Stars 163
Forks 31

Install this agent skill to your Project

npx add-skill https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry/tree/main/skills/data/parallel-code-review

SKILL.md

Parallel Code Review

Orchestrates a multi-agent code review using specialized reviewers running in parallel.

Arguments

  • --intent <description|@file> - Optional intent for alignment check
  • --quick - Only run security and data-integrity reviewers

Overview

Phase Action Purpose
1 Gather Diff Get code changes to review
2 Invoke Reviewers Spawn 5 specialized agents in parallel
3 Synthesize Aggregate and dedupe findings
4 Triage Present findings for FIX/SKIP/FALSE POSITIVE decisions

Reviewer Agents

Agent Focus Area
security-reviewer OWASP Top 10, injection, XSS, auth, secrets
data-integrity-reviewer Null checks, boundaries, race conditions
error-handling-reviewer Exceptions, catch blocks, error recovery
test-coverage-reviewer Missing tests, edge cases, assertions
maintainability-reviewer Coupling, naming, SRP, organization

All reviewers output findings in the standard JSON format defined in @.claude/agents/code-review/types.md.

Workflow

Phase 1: Gather Diff

Get the code changes to review:

bash
# Get staged and unstaged changes
git diff HEAD

If no changes exist, check for commits not pushed:

bash
# Changes since last push/merge
git diff origin/main...HEAD

If still no changes, inform user and exit.

Phase 2: Invoke Reviewers in Parallel

Spawn all reviewer agents simultaneously using Task tool. Each agent receives:

  1. The diff content
  2. Instructions to output findings in JSON format

For --quick mode: Only spawn security-reviewer and data-integrity-reviewer.

Standard mode (5 agents in parallel):

Launch ALL these Task tool calls in a SINGLE message:

Task 1: security-reviewer agent
  - subagent_type: "security-reviewer"
  - prompt: |
      Review this diff for security issues. Output JSON findings per the Finding schema.

      <diff>
      {diff content}
      </diff>

Task 2: data-integrity-reviewer agent
  - subagent_type: "data-integrity-reviewer"
  - prompt: |
      Review this diff for data integrity issues. Output JSON findings per the Finding schema.

      <diff>
      {diff content}
      </diff>

Task 3: error-handling-reviewer agent
  - subagent_type: "error-handling-reviewer"
  - prompt: |
      Review this diff for error handling issues. Output JSON findings per the Finding schema.

      <diff>
      {diff content}
      </diff>

Task 4: test-coverage-reviewer agent
  - subagent_type: "test-coverage-reviewer"
  - prompt: |
      Review this diff for test coverage issues. Output JSON findings per the Finding schema.

      <diff>
      {diff content}
      </diff>

Task 5: maintainability-reviewer agent
  - subagent_type: "maintainability-reviewer"
  - prompt: |
      Review this diff for maintainability issues. Output JSON findings per the Finding schema.

      <diff>
      {diff content}
      </diff>

CRITICAL: All 5 Task calls must be in a single message for true parallel execution.

Phase 3: Synthesize Results

After all reviewers complete, collect their JSON findings and pass to synthesizer:

Task: synthesizer agent
  - subagent_type: "synthesizer"
  - prompt: |
      Aggregate these findings from multiple reviewers. Dedupe, rank by severity x confidence, and group by file.

      <findings>
      {
        "reviewers": {
          "security-reviewer": { "findings": [...] },
          "data-integrity-reviewer": { "findings": [...] },
          "error-handling-reviewer": { "findings": [...] },
          "test-coverage-reviewer": { "findings": [...] },
          "maintainability-reviewer": { "findings": [...] }
        }
      }
      </findings>

The synthesizer outputs:

  • Summary statistics (total, unique, by severity, by reviewer)
  • Sorted findings array (highest priority first)
  • By-file grouping for navigation

Phase 4: Triage Findings

Present findings to user in chunks of 3-5 findings at a time, starting with highest priority.

For each chunk, display:

markdown
## Review Findings (Showing N-M of Total)

### Finding 1: [severity] in [file]:[line]

**Reviewer:** [agent name]
**Confidence:** [0-1]
**Description:** [issue description]
**Suggested Fix:**
```[language]
[code snippet if available]

Finding 2: ...


Use AskUserQuestion for triage decisions:

Questions:

  1. "What action for Finding 1: [brief description]?" Options:

    • FIX: Issue is valid, apply the fix
    • SKIP: Valid issue, won't fix now (add to tech debt)
    • FALSE POSITIVE: Not actually an issue (record for calibration)

  2. "What action for Finding 2: ..."

... up to 4 findings per question batch


After each batch:
- For FIX decisions: Apply the suggested fix or implement correction
- For SKIP: Note the reason if provided
- For FALSE POSITIVE: Record for future agent calibration
- Continue to next batch

### Completion

After all findings triaged, output summary:

```markdown
## Code Review Complete

**Findings Summary:**
- Total findings: N
- Fixed: X
- Skipped: Y
- False positives: Z

**Fixed Issues:**
1. [file:line] - [brief description]
2. ...

**Skipped (Tech Debt):**
1. [file:line] - [brief description] - [reason]
2. ...

**False Positives (for calibration):**
1. [file:line] - [brief description]
2. ...

Review Diary

If logs/reviews.jsonl exists or should be created, append entry:

json
{
  "timestamp": "2024-01-15T10:30:00Z",
  "mode": "parallel",
  "findingsCount": 12,
  "fixed": 8,
  "skipped": 3,
  "falsePositives": 1,
  "decisions": [
    { "id": "abc123", "action": "FIX" },
    { "id": "def456", "action": "SKIP", "reason": "tech debt" },
    { "id": "ghi789", "action": "FALSE_POSITIVE" }
  ]
}

Error Handling

  • No diff found: Inform user "No changes to review" and exit
  • Reviewer fails: Log error, continue with other reviewers' findings
  • No findings: Report "No issues found by any reviewer"
  • Synthesizer fails: Present raw findings ungrouped, note synthesis failed

Notes

  • All reviewers must complete before synthesis begins
  • Triage is interactive - requires user input for each finding
  • FIX actions should verify the fix compiles/lints before continuing
  • False positives are valuable data for improving agent accuracy

Recommended Agent Skills

Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.

majiayu000/claude-skill-registry

agent-ops-spec

Manage specification documents in .agent/specs/. Use when user provides requirements, acceptance criteria, or feature descriptions that need to be tracked and validated against implementation.

163 31
Explore
majiayu000/claude-skill-registry

agent-ops-state

Maintain .agent state files. Use at session start, after meaningful steps, and before concluding: read/update constitution/memory/focus/issues/baseline consistently.

163 31
Explore
majiayu000/claude-skill-registry

agent-ops-spec

Manage specification documents in .agent/specs/. Use when user provides requirements, acceptance criteria, or feature descriptions that need to be tracked and validated against implementation.

163 31
Explore
majiayu000/claude-skill-registry

agent-ops-testing

Test strategy, execution, and coverage analysis. Use when designing tests, running test suites, or analyzing test results beyond baseline checks.

163 31
Explore
majiayu000/claude-skill-registry

agent-ops-testing

Test strategy, execution, and coverage analysis. Use when designing tests, running test suites, or analyzing test results beyond baseline checks.

163 31
Explore
majiayu000/claude-skill-registry

agent-ops-state

Maintain .agent state files. Use at session start, after meaningful steps, and before concluding: read/update constitution/memory/focus/issues/baseline consistently.

163 31
Explore

Didn't find tool you were looking for?

Be as detailed as possible for better results