review-council

name

review-council

description

Send a document (plan, spec, PRD, ADR, code) to a review council of 2+ AI agents (Claude Code + Codex CLI by default, optionally Gemini CLI and Copilot CLI) for independent parallel review. Synthesizes feedback, auto-revises the document, and re-reviews if council members had high variance. Use when wanting multi-agent review, "review council", peer review from multiple AIs, or validating plans/specs/code before finalizing.

Fan out a document to multiple AI agents for independent review, synthesize feedback, and auto-revise.

Default council: Claude Code, Codex CLI Optional: Gemini CLI, Copilot CLI (add if installed and authenticated)

Step 1: Select persona

Read references/personas.md and select based on document type:

Document type	Persona
System design, implementation plan, architecture spec, ADR	Architect
PRD, feature spec, user stories, roadmap	Product Manager
Code review, PR diff, implementation	Staff Engineer
Test plan, deployment plan, migration	QA Lead

All council members use the same persona for a given review.

Step 2: Check CLI availability

which claude && echo "claude: available" || echo "claude: NOT FOUND"
which codex && echo "codex: available" || echo "codex: NOT FOUND"
which gemini && echo "gemini: available" || echo "gemini: NOT FOUND"
which copilot && echo "copilot: available" || echo "copilot: NOT FOUND"

Skip unavailable CLIs. Warn the user. Minimum 2 council members required.

Step 3: Write review prompt

Enrich with code principles: If the code-principles skill is installed (~/.claude/skills/code-principles/), read the reference files relevant to the persona (see personas.md for mapping) and extract the "Review question" from each principle. Append these as a "Code Principles" subsection under Review Criteria.

Write to .dispatch/council-<YYYY-MM-DDTHH-MM-SS>.md:

# Review Assignment

## Your Role
[Paste the selected persona from personas.md — role description + review focus areas]

## Document to Review
Read and review the following file: `<absolute-path-to-document>`

## Review Criteria
Evaluate for: completeness, logical flaws, missing ideas, DRY violations,
edge cases, unstated assumptions, and anything that could cause problems.

### Code Principles
[If code-principles skill is available, insert review questions from relevant principle groups here]

## Output Format
Structure your response exactly as:

## Strengths
- ...

## Critical Issues
- ...

## Minor Issues
- ...

## Suggestions
- ...

## Overall Assessment
[1-2 sentences: ready to proceed / needs minor revisions / needs major rework]

Step 4: Fan out to council

IMPORTANT: Do NOT use sub-agents (Agent tool) — they cannot get Bash permissions to run external CLIs. Instead, run CLI commands directly as background Bash tasks (run_in_background: true). This still parallelizes the work.

Launch all CLI commands in a single message with multiple Bash tool calls.

For detailed CLI flags, read the reference files in ~/.claude/skills/dispatch-cli-agent/references/ (e.g., claude-code.md, codex-cli.md, gemini-cli.md, copilot-cli.md).

Background Bash commands

Launch all in parallel (single message, multiple Bash calls, all with run_in_background: true):

Claude Code:

cat <PROMPT_FILE> | claude -p - \
  --output-format json \
  --allowedTools "Read,Glob,Grep" \
  --max-turns 10 \
  --no-session-persistence 2>/dev/null \
  | jq -r '.result' > .dispatch/review-claude.md

Codex CLI:

cat <PROMPT_FILE> | codex exec - \
  --json --ephemeral 2>/dev/null \
  | grep '"type":"item.completed"' \
  | jq -rs '[.[].item.text] | join("\n")' > .dispatch/review-codex.md

Gemini CLI:

cat <PROMPT_FILE> | gemini -p - 2>/dev/null \
  > .dispatch/review-gemini.md

Note: Gemini --output-format json may not produce stdout. Use plain text output instead.

Copilot CLI (optional):

cat <PROMPT_FILE> | copilot -p - \
  -s --no-ask-user --no-custom-instructions \
  --deny-tool "Bash(rm *)" --deny-tool "Bash(git push*)" 2>/dev/null \
  > .dispatch/review-copilot.md

Replace <PROMPT_FILE> with the exact path from Step 3. Read the output files after all background tasks complete.

Step 5: Collect and assess variance

When all background tasks complete, compare their reviews:

Low variance — council broadly agrees on the same issues and direction. Proceed to synthesis.

High variance — council members explicitly contradict each other:

• One says "critical flaw" on an aspect while another says "looks good" on the same aspect
• Members propose fundamentally incompatible suggestions
• One recommends "needs major rework" while another says "ready to proceed"

Flag high variance for mandatory re-review in Step 7.

Step 6: Synthesize and auto-revise

1. Deduplicate — merge identical or overlapping feedback
2. Prioritize — rank by severity (critical → minor → suggestion)
3. Cross-check against code principles — if code-principles skill is available, verify synthesis addresses principle violations flagged by council members. Tag each applied revision with the principle it addresses (e.g., "Applied: SRP violation in tool registration")
4. Revise — apply changes directly to the original document
5. Log — write synthesis summary to .dispatch/council-synthesis-<timestamp>.md:
   • Which feedback items were applied
   • Which were skipped and why
   • Variance assessment (low/high)

Step 7: Re-review (conditional)

Variance	Action
High	Mandatory — send revised document back through council (repeat Steps 4-6)
Low	Optional — skip unless orchestrator judges revisions were significant

Max 2 total rounds to prevent infinite loops. If still high variance after round 2, present unresolved disagreements to the user.

Step 8: Present result

Show the user:

1. Final revised document (or diff from original)
2. Changes summary — what was modified and why
3. Unresolved disagreements — if any council members still disagree after revision
4. Council participation — which CLIs were used, which were unavailable