| name | multi-ai-review |
| description | Claude + Gemini CLI + Codex CLI multi-AI consensus engine.
3-Stage Pipeline (opinions → rebuttal → synthesis) drives consensus across domains:
code review, market analysis, investment diligence, risk assessment, and more.
Automatically detects domain from natural language and applies appropriate preset.
Triggers:
- "review this", "convene a council", "get multiple AI opinions", "deep review", "consensus"
- "market analysis", "macro analysis", "investment review", "risk assessment"
- Any situation needing multiple perspectives — trigger proactively
|
| version | 4.2.0 |
| updated | "2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z" |
Multi-AI Review — Universal Consensus Engine
Heavy-Hitter: State the domain in natural language — right panel assembled automatically.
Cost: CLI subscription plans only — no additional API charges.
Quick Start
# Code review
"Review this PR"
# Market analysis
"How does the market look today?"
# Investment
"Evaluate this investment"
# Consensus (auto-applied)
"Convene a council on this direction"
Prerequisites
command -v claude
command -v gemini
command -v codex
3-Stage Pipeline
Stage 1: Initial Opinions (parallel)
├── Gemini CLI → opinion.md (perspective A)
└── Codex CLI → opinion.md (perspective B)
Stage 2: Cross-Review (rebuttal)
├── Gemini reviews/rebuts Codex
└── Codex reviews/rebuts Gemini
Stage 3: Chairman Synthesis
└── Claude synthesizes → Score Card → decides if more rounds needed
Domain Auto-Routing
Keywords detected automatically — no preset naming needed.
| Preset | Keywords | Gemini | Codex |
|---|
| code-review | review, PR, code, merge | architecture/UX | technical/patterns |
| market-regime | market, stocks, macro | macro/news | quant/indicators |
| investment | investment, valuation, deal | market/strategy | finance/risk |
| risk-assessment | risk, security, danger | external threats | internal weaknesses |
| project-gate | gate, milestone, Go/No-Go | stakeholders/scope | schedule/resources |
| planning | plan, PRD, design, architecture, council | CTO (architecture/scalability) | Security (threats/compliance) |
| default | (fallback) | strategy/opportunity | execution/risk |
Full presets: presets/*.yaml
Score Card
Grade Thresholds
| Grade | Min Score |
|---|
| A | 90 |
| B | 80 |
| C | 70 |
| D | 60 |
| F | 0 |
Severity Labels
| Label | Meaning |
|---|
| Critical | Immediate action |
| High | Priority recommended |
| Medium | Improvement recommended |
| Low | For reference |
Key Dimensions (code-review example)
| Dimension | Weight |
|---|
| Security | 25% |
| Performance | 20% |
| Maintainability | 25% |
| Correctness | 20% |
| Style | 10% |
Chairman Rules (v4.1.0)
Core Principles:
- Evidence Hierarchy — file:line citations outrank structural scores
- Verification Required — score changes need grep/file read/test proof
- Pre-Deploy Gate — Done-When checks BEFORE deployment
- Delta Arbitration — score gap ≥15 triggers verification (no averaging)
- 2× Codex Weight — in code-review/project-gate when verified
- Council Skeptic —
planning domain: play Devil's Advocate. Challenge every recommendation with "What's the tradeoff?" — never accept "good point" without a follow-up probing question.
- Planning Fallback —
planning domain + CLI unavailable: spawn Agent(CTO) + Agent(UX) + Agent(Security) per references/council-personas.md instead of skipping.
Quick Reference:
| Rule | Trigger | Action |
|---|
| Evidence Hierarchy | Concrete vs structural | Prioritize file:line |
| Verification Required | Score adjustment | Run grep/file read first |
| Pre-Deploy Gate | Task completion | Block if checks fail |
| Delta Arbitration | Gap ≥15 | Verify, don't average |
| 2× Weight | code-review + verified Codex | Formula: (codex×2 + gemini)/3 |
| Council Skeptic | planning domain | "What's the tradeoff?" on every recommendation |
| Planning Fallback | planning + no CLI | Spawn Agent(CTO) + Agent(UX) + Agent(Security) |
Detailed rules: references/evidence-rules.md
Chairman Protocol (Stage 3)
1. Extract Evidence
- File:line citations (Codex)
- Structural observations (Gemini)
- Run Done-When verification
2. Consensus Evaluation
- Consensus reached? → Proceed
- Unresolved issues? → Additional round
- Score gap ≥15? → Verify per Evidence Rules
3. Additional Round (if needed, max 2)
- Focused question on contention point
- Re-run Cross-Review
4. Final Synthesis
- Score Card with grades
- Severity summary
- Recommendations
Full protocol: references/chairman-protocol.md
CI Quality Gate
./skills/multi-ai-review/scripts/council.sh --mode ci "review request"
Thresholds (council.config.yaml):
- Critical issues: fail if > 0
- High issues: fail if > 3
- Overall score: fail if < 70
on_fail: "block" — returns non-zero exit code.
Preset Verdicts
| Preset | Verdict Options |
|---|
| code-review | A / B / C / D / F (score-based) |
| market-regime | Strong Bull / Bull / Neutral / Bear / Strong Bear |
| investment | Strong Buy / Buy / Hold / Pass / Strong Pass |
| risk-assessment | Critical / High / Medium / Low / Negligible |
| planning | Strongly Recommend / Recommend / Revise / Major Revise / Reject |
| default | Strong Agree / Agree / Neutral / Disagree / Strong Disagree |
File Structure
skills/multi-ai-review/
├── SKILL.md # this file
├── council.config.yaml # member, routing, scoring config
├── presets/
│ ├── code-review.yaml
│ ├── market-regime.yaml
│ ├── investment.yaml
│ └── default.yaml
├── scripts/
│ └── council.sh # main execution
└── references/
├── evidence-rules.md # Chairman Evidence Weighting (detailed)
└── chairman-protocol.md # Stage 3 protocol (detailed)
Last Updated: 2026-04-01 (v4.2.0 — Council mode: planning preset + CTO/UX/Security personas + Council Skeptic rule)
