multi-reviewer-patterns
wshobson/agents
Coordinate parallel code reviews across multiple dimensions with deduplication, severity calibration, and consolidated reporting.
What is multi-reviewer-patterns?
Organize multi-dimensional code reviews by assigning reviewers to specific quality dimensions (Security, Performance, Architecture, Testing, Accessibility), then deduplicate findings, calibrate severity consistently, and produce a consolidated report. Use this when you need structured multi-reviewer coordination with consistent severity ratings and unified output.
- Allocate code review dimensions (Security, Performance, Architecture, Testing, Accessibility) based on change type
- Deduplicate findings from multiple reviewers using merge rules for same location and issue type
- Calibrate severity ratings consistently across reviewers using defined criteria (Critical, High, Medium, Low)
- Consolidate findings into a structured report organized by severity and dimension
- Cross-reference conflicting recommendations and co-located issues with reviewer attribution
How to install multi-reviewer-patterns
npx skills add https://github.com/wshobson/agents --skill multi-reviewer-patternsHow to use multi-reviewer-patterns
- 1.Select review dimensions based on the type of change (use the Recommended Combinations table)
- 2.Assign reviewers to each dimension and collect their findings
- 3.For each finding, identify duplicates using the Merge Rules (same file:line, same issue)
- 4.Merge duplicate findings, keeping the higher severity rating and more detailed description
- 5.Apply Severity Calibration Rules to ensure consistent ratings across all findings
- 6.Organize findings by severity level (Critical, High, Medium, Low)
- 7.Generate a consolidated report using the provided template with summary table by dimension
Use cases
- Reviewing an API endpoint change across Security, Performance, and Architecture dimensions
- Consolidating findings from multiple reviewers on a frontend component with different severity assessments
- Deduplicating duplicate findings reported by both Security and Testing reviewers at the same code location
- Producing a unified code review report with summary table for stakeholder communication
- Calibrating severity ratings when reviewers disagree on impact level of the same issue
- Code review coordinators managing multi-reviewer processes
- Engineering leads organizing structured reviews for critical changes
- Teams implementing consistent severity rating standards
- Projects requiring consolidated reporting across multiple review dimensions
multi-reviewer-patterns FAQ
Use the Recommended Combinations table based on your change type. For example, API endpoint changes should include Security, Performance, and Architecture. Always include Security for code handling user input or authentication.
Merge them into one finding, credit both reviewers, keep the more detailed description, and use the higher severity rating. Tag as merged and include both reviewer attributions.
Always use the higher severity rating. If reviewers disagree on recommendations, include both with clear attribution to each reviewer.
Critical findings cause data loss, security breaches, or complete failure (certain/very likely impact). High findings cause significant functionality degradation (likely impact). Security vulnerabilities exploitable by external users are always Critical or High.
Yes, keep them as separate findings but cross-reference them. Only merge findings at the exact same file:line that describe the same issue.
Full instructions (SKILL.md)
Source of truth, from wshobson/agents.
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:line
2. If yes, check if they describe the same issue
3. If same issue: merge, keeping the more detailed description
4. 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
## 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}
Related skills
More from wshobson/agents and the wider catalog.

nextjs-app-router-patterns
Master Next.js 14+ App Router with Server Components, streaming, and advanced patterns.

nft-standards
Implement ERC-721 and ERC-1155 NFT standards with metadata, minting, royalties, and marketplace integration.

nodejs-backend-patterns
Build production-ready Node.js backends with Express/Fastify, middleware patterns, authentication, and database integration.

nx-workspace-patterns
Configure and optimize Nx monorepo workspaces with production patterns for project boundaries, caching, and affected commands.

on-call-handoff-patterns
Master on-call shift handoffs with structured context transfer and escalation procedures.

openapi-spec-generation
Generate and maintain OpenAPI 3.1 specifications from code, design-first specs, and validation patterns.