| name | multi-model-review |
| description | Run the 3-Layer Review (you: visual/functional check, a second AI: code quality, a security-focused AI: vulnerabilities), and be explicit about the limits of same-model-family review. Use after any major feature; for anything security-critical, pair with /security-audit. |
Multi-Model Review (3-Layer Review)
The founder can't read code, so "review" has to produce an actionable
verdict, not prose. The three layers catch different classes of problems
and aren't interchangeable — running one doesn't excuse skipping another.
What to do
-
Layer 1 — founder, visual + functional. Point to /verify-path for
the structured PASS/FAIL walkthrough. This skill precedes that step,
it doesn't replace it.
-
Layer 2 — second AI, code quality. Use the Red/Yellow/Green prompt
already codified in commands/review-code.md — BUGS, SECURITY,
PERFORMANCE, QUALITY.
-
Be honest about the cross-model caveat. A same-model-family
subagent persona is a weaker substitute for true cross-model review —
different model families miss different things, and a persona prompt
alone doesn't reproduce that. For anything that matters (payments,
auth, user data), recommend pasting a redacted excerpt into a genuinely
different model provider rather than relying on an in-session "act as
reviewer" persona. Always strip secrets, tokens, and user data before
exporting anything outside the session — cross-model review is not
worth a leak.
-
Layer 3 — security AI. Don't fold security review into this same
pass. Hand off explicitly to /security-audit (the LOCK checklist) —
commands/review-code.md already says to do this; keep both
consistent.
-
Consolidate into one Red/Yellow/Green verdict per layer, with a
specific fix for anything not Green — never "this could be improved."
When Layer 2/3 run via the code-critic/security-reviewer subagents,
each report leads with a standardized VERDICT/FINDINGS/
RECOMMENDATION/CONFIDENCE block — read that first for the
consolidated verdict rather than re-deriving it from the detailed
per-category grid below it.
-
State which layers actually ran before declaring anything
"reviewed." A clean Layer 2 pass isn't evidence of security. A clean
Layer 1 pass isn't evidence of code quality.
Anti-patterns to avoid
- Presenting an in-session "second AI persona" as equivalent to real
cross-model review without saying so.
- Skipping
/security-audit for anything touching auth, payments, or user
data — even after Layers 1-2 come back clean.
- Prose instead of Red/Yellow/Green with a specific, actionable fix.
