
Cross Agent Delegation
- 83 installs
- 706 repo stars
- Updated July 14, 2026
- alinaqi/claude-bootstrap
cross-agent-delegation is a Claude skill that routes coding tasks to Kimi, Codex, or Claude based on a five-dimension complexity score.
About
cross-agent-delegation lets Claude Code orchestrate task routing to other AI CLI tools like Kimi and Codex behind the scenes. It scores a task on five complexity dimensions, sourced from iCPG signals and reasoning, then routes low-risk work to Kimi, medium-risk work to Kimi plus Codex auto-review, and high-risk work to Claude directly. A developer uses it to delegate bounded work safely while keeping security-critical changes in Claude's context.
- Routes tasks between Claude, Kimi, and Codex by a 5-dimension complexity score
- Runs automatic Codex auto-review on the diff after tests pass
- Makes iCPG and Mnemos context mandatory before delegating
Cross Agent Delegation by the numbers
- 83 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #5,144 of 16,546 AI & Agent Building skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Aug 5, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
cross-agent-delegation capabilities & compatibility
- Capabilities
- orchestration · code review
- Use cases
- orchestration · code review
- Pricing
- Free
What cross-agent-delegation says it does
Claude Code orchestrates task routing to Kimi and Codex. The user interacts with Claude only — delegation happens behind the scenes.
File count is a poor proxy for delegation risk. A 1-file change to an authz path is harder than a 12-file rename.
When Codex is installed, a Stop hook reviews code after tests pass:
npx skills add https://github.com/alinaqi/claude-bootstrap --skill cross-agent-delegationAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 83 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 706 |
| Last updated | July 14, 2026 |
| Repository | alinaqi/claude-bootstrap ↗ |
What it does
Route a coding task to Kimi, Codex, or Claude based on a five-dimension complexity score.
Who is it for?
Delegating bounded, low-risk coding work to Kimi or Codex while keeping risky changes in Claude
Skip if: Security-sensitive, cross-service, or shared-interface changes, which the docs say to keep in Claude
When should I use this skill?
Multiple AI CLI tools such as Claude, Kimi, and Codex are available and work can be delegated
What you get
A routing decision that sends bounded work to Kimi or Codex and keeps risky work with Claude
- a routing decision per task
- a mnemos checkpoint passed to the delegate
By the numbers
- Five complexity dimensions scored 0-2 for a 0-10 total
- Routing bands: 0-3 Kimi, 4-6 Kimi+Codex, 7-10 Claude
Files
Cross-Agent Delegation
Claude Code orchestrates task routing to Kimi and Codex. The user interacts with Claude only — delegation happens behind the scenes.
---
Tool Detection
At session start, detect available tools:
command -v kimi &>/dev/null && HAS_KIMI=true || HAS_KIMI=false
command -v codex &>/dev/null && HAS_CODEX=true || HAS_CODEX=false---
Codex Auto-Review (Stop Hook — Automatic)
When Codex is installed, a Stop hook reviews code after tests pass:
1. TDD loop check runs tests 2. codex-auto-review.sh runs Codex on the diff 3. Critical/High findings feed back to Claude (exit 2) 4. Clean reviews pass through (exit 0)
Fully automatic. No user or Claude action needed.
---
Kimi Delegation (Claude Orchestrates)
When Kimi is installed and the task complexity is bounded, Claude delegates directly — the user does not need to run anything.
Step 1: Score complexity, not file count
File count is a poor proxy for delegation risk. A 1-file change to an authz path is harder than a 12-file rename. Score the task on five dimensions, each 0-2, sourced from iCPG signals plus Claude's semantic reasoning:
| Dimension | 0 (low) | 1 (medium) | 2 (high) | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cyclomatic / surface depth | <10 LOC, no branches | 10-50 LOC, ≤3 branches | 50+ LOC or nested control flow | iCPG query_graph over function bodies |
| Fan-out (consumer blast radius) | 0-2 callers | 3-10 callers | 11+ callers | iCPG trace_path(<symbol>, mode=callers) |
| Crosses a security boundary (SEC-006, auth, PII, RLS, org-scope, billing, payments) | None | Tangential | Direct read or write | iCPG SEC-* / R-063 tags + grep for org_id, user_id, auth, pii |
| Concurrency / transactional | Pure / sync | Async only | Locks, transactions, atomic claims, FOR UPDATE, asyncio.Lock, session.begin | iCPG concurrency flags + grep |
| Domain invariants required | None / well-documented inline | Some implicit (need to read 1-2 files) | Heavy (cross-doc, ADR-bound, RFC-bound) | Claude reasoning + iCPG ADR linkage |
# Auto-collect signals
icpg query blast <scope> --format json # fan-out, async flags, sec tags
grep -rE "org_id|user_id|auth|pii" <file> # cheap sec heuristic if iCPG flags absent
grep -rE "asyncio.Lock|FOR UPDATE|session.begin" <file> # concurrency heuristicStep 2: Sum → routing
| Total score | Route | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| 0-3 | Kimi solo | Bounded surface, no security/concurrency/cross-doc concerns |
| 4-6 | Kimi → Codex auto-review (no user prompt) | Real risk, but not so high that we need full Claude context — Codex catches what Kimi might miss |
| 7-10 | Claude handles directly | Cross-cutting / security-critical / concurrency-heavy — needs full context |
Step 3: Floor — trivial-case shortcut
To skip iCPG-query cost on truly trivial work:
# If <2 files changed AND no SEC/auth/PII/concurrency keyword in diff,
# → auto-Kimi without scoring.
FILES=$(git diff --name-only | wc -l)
HAS_RISK_KEYWORDS=$(git diff | grep -ciE "org_id|auth|pii|asyncio|FOR UPDATE|transaction|session\.begin" || true)
if [ "$FILES" -lt 2 ] && [ "$HAS_RISK_KEYWORDS" -eq 0 ]; then
AUTO_KIMI=true
fiThis handles the trivial-rename / typo-fix case without paying the iCPG round-trip.
When NOT to Delegate (overrides scoring)
- User explicitly asked Claude to do it
- Cross-service changes (API + frontend + database) — needs full context regardless of score
- Production hotfix on a release branch — cross-tool review latency is too high
- Score 7+ in any single dimension (one critical axis is enough to keep Claude in the loop)
Step 4: Delegate via Bash
Claude writes a mnemos checkpoint, then runs Kimi headless:
# 1. Save current context to disk
mnemos checkpoint --force
# 2. Get context summary for Kimi
CONTEXT=$(mnemos resume 2>/dev/null)
# 3. Get constraints for target files
CONSTRAINTS=$(icpg query constraints <target-file> 2>/dev/null)
# 4. Run Kimi headless with full context
kimi --print -y -w . -p "
## Context (from mnemos checkpoint)
$CONTEXT
## Constraints (from iCPG)
$CONSTRAINTS
## Task
<specific task description>
## Rules
- Run tests after changes
- Record changes: icpg record --base main
- Write checkpoint when done: mnemos checkpoint --force
"Step 4: Read Results
After Kimi finishes, Claude:
# Read what Kimi did
mnemos resume # Kimi's checkpoint
icpg status # Kimi's recorded symbols
git diff # Kimi's file changesWhen NOT to Delegate
- Security-sensitive code (auth, crypto, payments)
- Cross-service changes (API + frontend + database)
- Refactors that touch shared interfaces
- User explicitly asked Claude to do it
---
iCPG — Mandatory for All Agents
Before ANY code change, Claude runs these (and includes results when delegating):
Pre-Task Queries
# 1. Duplicate check — already done?
icpg query prior "<goal>"
# 2. Constraints — what invariants apply?
icpg query constraints <file-path>
# 3. Risk — is this symbol fragile?
icpg query risk <symbol-name>After Code Changes
icpg record --reason <id> --base main
icpg drift check---
Mnemos — Mandatory for All Agents
At Task Start
mnemos add goal "<task description>"At Sub-Goal Boundaries
mnemos checkpointAt Task End (auto-handled by Stop hook)
mnemos checkpoint --forceContext Transfer Between Tools
The checkpoint is the bridge. Claude writes it, Kimi reads it:
# Claude saves state
mnemos checkpoint --force
# Kimi (or Codex) reads state
mnemos resumeThe checkpoint contains: goal, constraints, recent files, git state, fatigue level.
---
Full Orchestration Flow
TASK ARRIVES (user tells Claude)
|
v
[1] Claude: icpg query prior "<goal>" ← Already done?
[2] Claude: trivial-case shortcut ← <2 files & no risk keywords?
|
+-- YES + Kimi installed -----> AUTO-KIMI (no scoring)
|
+-- NO ↓
v
[3] Claude: score complexity (5 dims × 0-2, iCPG + reasoning)
|
+-- score 0-3 ----> KIMI SOLO PATH
| [a] mnemos checkpoint --force
| [b] kimi --print -y -p "..."
| [c] mnemos resume + git diff
| [d] Continue in Claude
|
+-- score 4-6 ----> KIMI + CODEX REVIEW PATH
| [a] mnemos checkpoint --force
| [b] kimi --print -y -p "..."
| [c] codex review --uncommitted ← Auto-review the diff
| [d] If P0/P1 findings: re-prompt Kimi with findings
| [e] Once clean: continue in Claude
|
+-- score 7-10 ----> CLAUDE DIRECT PATH (full context)
|
v
[4] icpg query constraints <files> ← Invariants
[5] icpg query risk <symbols> ← Fragility
[6] mnemos add goal "<task>" ← Track in memory
|
v
[7] IMPLEMENT (TDD: RED -> GREEN)
|
v
[8] Stop: tdd-loop-check.sh ← Tests pass?
[9] Stop: codex-auto-review.sh ← Codex reviews diff
[10] Stop: icpg-stop-record.sh ← Record symbols
[11] Stop: mnemos-checkpoint.sh ← Save memoryRelated skills
FAQ
How is a task routed?
It is scored 0-10 across five dimensions; 0-3 goes to Kimi solo, 4-6 to Kimi plus Codex review, and 7-10 stays with Claude directly.
When should work not be delegated?
The docs say to keep security-sensitive code, cross-service changes, and shared-interface refactors in Claude regardless of score.