team-review

name	team-review
description	Multi-perspective review — code-reviewer + security-reviewer + architect in parallel, merged into one report

Coordinate a thorough multi-perspective review of the current changes. YOU (the main session) are the orchestrator — you spawn the reviewers in parallel and wait for all of them.

Scope: the task/scope the user described when invoking this skill (if none given, ask or infer from context)

Concurrency & nesting limits: at most 6 subagents run concurrently; nesting depth is 1, so spawned subagents CANNOT spawn their own subagents. The main session orchestrates directly.

Phase 1: Gather changes

If no scope is given, run git diff and git diff --staged to identify what changed. Summarize the change set so each reviewer has context.

Phase 2: Review (PARALLEL)

Spawn all three in a single batch and wait for ALL to finish:

• code-reviewer — quality, maintainability, performance, a quick security pass.
• security-reviewer — full security audit (secrets, injection, auth, access control, data exposure, deps, config).
• architect — architectural soundness: does the change fit existing patterns, introduce coupling, or create scaling/maintainability risks.

Give each the same change set and scope.

Phase 3: Merge findings

Combine all three reports into ONE consolidated review:

• Deduplicate overlapping findings (e.g. both code-reviewer and security-reviewer flag the same secret — report it once, keeping the highest severity).
• Group by canonical severity: CRITICAL / WARNING / INFO.
• For each finding: file:line, description, which reviewer(s) raised it, and the suggested fix.
• Note any disagreements between reviewers and give your adjudicated call.

Output Format

## Consolidated Review

### CRITICAL
**[file:line]** Description (raised by: code/security/architect)
Suggestion: …

### WARNING
…

### INFO
…

### Summary
- Totals by severity
- Overall: APPROVE / REQUEST_CHANGES

Rules

• This is review-only — do NOT modify code.
• Spawn the three reviewers concurrently (they are independent).
• One finding, one entry — merge duplicates across reviewers.