multi-ai-review

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   # Claude Code (Chairman)
command -v gemini   # Gemini CLI (optional)
command -v codex    # Codex CLI (optional)

---

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:

1. Evidence Hierarchy — file:line citations outrank structural scores
2. Verification Required — score changes need grep/file read/test proof
3. Pre-Deploy Gate — Done-When checks BEFORE deployment
4. Delta Arbitration — score gap ≥15 triggers verification (no averaging)
5. 2× Codex Weight — in code-review/project-gate when verified
6. 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.
7. 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)