Consensus-driven code and document review using multiple AI models.
A Claude Code skill that orchestrates parallel reviews from any combination of AI CLIs (Codex, Gemini, Aider, Ollama, etc.), synthesizes findings with confidence scoring, and iterates until consensus approval.
v1.0.0
Every AI model has blind spots. A single model might miss a security vulnerability that another catches instantly. Multi-AI Review solves this by:
- Redundant coverage — Every model reviews every domain independently
- Consensus scoring — Findings agreed upon by 2+ models are high-confidence signals
- Conflict resolution — When models disagree, Claude arbitrates with full codebase context
- Iterative improvement — Fix-and-re-review loops continue until consensus approval
| Review Type | Domains | How to Trigger |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | Security, Bugs, Robustness, Performance, Architecture, Scalability, UX, Maintainability | review this code or /review |
| Security Audit | Deep security analysis with OWASP checklist | review with a security focus |
| UX Review | Accessibility (WCAG 2.1 AA), responsive design, component compliance | review for ux and accessibility |
| Document Review | Completeness, accuracy, clarity, consistency, product thinking | review the spec at specs/029/plan.md |
| Pre-Merge Gate | All code domains + regression checks | review as a pre-merge gate |
Copy the multi-ai-review folder to your Claude Code skills directory:
# Option 1: Download and copy
# Download the multi-ai-review folder and copy it to your Claude Code skills directory:
cp -r multi-ai-review ~/.claude/skills/
# Option 2: Clone from GitHub
# git clone <repo-url>
# cp -r multi-ai-review ~/.claude/skills/The skill registers as /review. The folder name stays multi-ai-review.
File structure:
~/.claude/skills/multi-ai-review/
SKILL.md
config.md
references/
domains.md
synthesis.md
prompts.md
At least one external AI CLI is needed. Claude always participates as a reviewer.
# Check what's available
codex --version # OpenAI Codex CLI
gemini --version # Google Gemini CLINatural language works best. All of these trigger the skill:
/review — Review uncommitted changes (standard profile)
review this code — Same as above, natural language
review src/auth/login.ts for security issues — Specific file, security focus
review the spec at docs/plan.md — Document review
do a deep review of the authentication changes — Deep profile, scoped to auth
run a quick review — Fast single-model pass
Claude interprets your intent from natural language — no special syntax needed. If the intent is ambiguous, Claude will ask which profile and scope you want.
| Profile | Speed | Coverage | Best For |
|---|---|---|---|
quick |
Fast | 2 domains, 1 model | Small changes |
standard |
Medium | All 8 domains, 2 models | Default for most work |
deep |
Slow | All domains, all models, 2-3 passes | Critical features |
security |
Medium | Security-focused, all models | Auth, APIs, data handling |
ux |
Medium | UX + accessibility, all models | UI components |
doc |
Medium | 8 doc domains, 2 models | Specs, plans, PRDs |
pre-merge |
Medium | All domains + regression checks | Final merge gate |
Phase 1: Scope → Detect changes, build file list, gather context
Phase 2: Review → Run external models IN PARALLEL (Codex, Gemini, etc.)
Phase 3: Self-Review → Claude reviews independently with full codebase context
Phase 4: Synthesize → Cross-reference findings, assign confidence levels
Phase 5: Report → Generate consensus report with matrix and scores
Phase 6: Iterate → Fix issues, re-review, repeat until consensus
Phase 7: Certify → Final certification when all models approve
| Domain | Claude | Codex | Gemini | Consensus | Spread |
|----------------|--------|-------|--------|-----------|--------|
| Security | 9/10 | 8/10 | 9/10 | 8.7/10 | 1 |
| Bugs & Logic | 8/10 | 9/10 | 8/10 | 8.3/10 | 1 |
| Performance | 7/10 | 7/10 | 9/10 | 7.7/10 | 2 |
| Architecture | 9/10 | 9/10 | 8/10 | 8.7/10 | 1 |
Spread > 2 is flagged — it means one model saw something others missed.
| Level | Meaning | Action |
|---|---|---|
| HIGH | 2+ models found the same issue | Fix immediately |
| MEDIUM | 1 model found it | Verify, likely valid |
| REVIEW | Models disagree | Claude arbitrates |
Any CLI that accepts a prompt and returns text works. See config.md for full details.
Name: ollama-qwen
Verify: ollama list | grep qwen2.5-coder
Invoke: echo "{PROMPT}" | ollama run qwen2.5-coder:32b
Workspace access: No
Timeout: 600s
Supported out of the box: Codex CLI, Gemini CLI
Community examples: Aider, Ollama, sgpt, custom scripts
multi-ai-review/
├── SKILL.md # Main orchestration (loaded on trigger)
├── config.md # Model registry + profile definitions
├── references/
│ ├── domains.md # 16 review domains (8 code + 8 doc)
│ ├── synthesis.md # Consensus algorithm + report template
│ └── prompts.md # Prompt templates for external models
├── README.md # This file
└── CHANGELOG.md # Version history
Progressive disclosure: Only SKILL.md loads initially. Reference files load on-demand
based on the current review phase, keeping context window usage efficient.
- Redundancy over division — Every model reviews everything. No splitting work.
- Confidence from consensus — Multi-model agreement is the strongest signal.
- Structured output — Same format from every model enables automated synthesis.
- Progressive depth — Quick for small changes, deep for critical code.
- Project-aware — Reads your CLAUDE.md for project-specific standards.
- Graceful degradation — Works with 1 model, better with 2, best with 3+.
- Iterative — Fix-and-re-review until consensus, max 3 iterations.
Add to your CLAUDE.md:
## Multi-AI Review Defaults
- Default profile: standard
- Default models: codex, gemini
- Always include domains: security
- Extra criteria: Must follow our API versioning patternreview with the deep profile using codex and gemini, run 3 passes
review only the security and performance domains, critical and important only
review but skip the scalability and maintainability domains
- Claude Code (any version with skills support)
- At least one external AI CLI (Codex, Gemini, Aider, Ollama, etc.)
- External CLIs must be authenticated and working independently
MIT — use freely, contribute improvements.
- Fork this repository
- Add your improvement (new domain criteria, model support, profiles)
- Test with the skill itself:
review your changes as a doc reviewon your changes - Submit a PR
The best contributions are battle-tested improvements from real review sessions.