
Orchestrate Review
- 2 installs
- 931 repo stars
- Updated July 26, 2026
- avifenesh/awesome-slash
orchestrate-review is a skill that runs a multi-pass code review with parallel agents, aggregates their findings by severity, and iterates until the code is clean.
About
This skill orchestrates a multi-pass code review by spawning parallel review agents, each focused on a different concern. It runs four core passes for code quality, security, performance, and test coverage, and adds conditional specialists like database or frontend based on detected file signals. A developer uses it for a thorough or deep review, and it aggregates findings by severity and iterates until the code is clean.
- Multi-pass code review using parallel Task agents, one per review pass
- Four core passes (code quality, security, performance, test coverage) plus signal-based specialists
- Aggregates and deduplicates findings by severity, iterating until clean
Orchestrate Review by the numbers
- 2 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #947 of 1,352 Code Review & Quality skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Aug 5, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
orchestrate-review capabilities & compatibility
- Capabilities
- code review · security audit · test coverage review · performance review
- Use cases
- code review · security audit · testing · orchestration
What orchestrate-review says it does
Multi-pass code review with parallel Task agents, finding aggregation, and iteration until clean.
Spawn parallel `general-purpose` Task agents (model: `sonnet`), one per pass:
needsArchitecture: files.length > 20 // 20+ files typically indicates cross-module changes
npx skills add https://github.com/avifenesh/awesome-slash --skill orchestrate-reviewAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 2 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 931 |
| Last updated | July 26, 2026 |
| Repository | avifenesh/awesome-slash ↗ |
What it does
Run a thorough multi-pass code review that spawns parallel specialist agents and aggregates findings by severity.
Who is it for?
Developers who want a deep, multi-angle review of a changeset with security, performance, and test-coverage passes in parallel.
Skip if: Quick single-file lint checks or reviews where you only want one narrow perspective.
When should I use this skill?
You ask to deep review the code, run a thorough or multi-pass review, or orchestrate a Phase 9 review loop.
What you get
A deduplicated, severity-grouped set of findings from multiple specialist review passes, iterated until clean.
- severity-grouped findings
- deduplicated review report
By the numbers
- 4 core review passes
- 6 conditional signal-based specialists
- 4 severity levels (critical, high, medium, low)
Files
Orchestrate Review
Multi-pass code review with parallel Task agents, finding aggregation, and iteration until clean.
Scope-Based Specialist Selection
Select conditional specialists based on the review scope:
- User request: Detect signals from content user refers to (files, directory, module)
- Workflow (Phase 9): Detect signals from changed files only
- Project audit: Detect signals from project structure as a whole
Review Passes
Spawn parallel general-purpose Task agents (model: sonnet), one per pass:
Core (Always)
const corePasses = [
{ id: 'code-quality', role: 'code quality reviewer',
focus: ['Style and consistency', 'Best practices', 'Bugs and logic errors', 'Error handling', 'Maintainability', 'Duplication'] },
{ id: 'security', role: 'security reviewer',
focus: ['Auth/authz flaws', 'Input validation', 'Injection risks', 'Secrets exposure', 'Insecure defaults'] },
{ id: 'performance', role: 'performance reviewer',
focus: ['N+1 queries', 'Blocking operations', 'Hot path inefficiencies', 'Memory leaks'] },
{ id: 'test-coverage', role: 'test coverage reviewer',
focus: ['Missing tests', 'Edge case coverage', 'Test quality', 'Integration needs', 'Mock appropriateness'] }
];Conditional (Signal-Based)
if (signals.hasDb) passes.push({ id: 'database', role: 'database specialist',
focus: ['Query performance', 'Indexes/transactions', 'Migration safety', 'Data integrity'] });
if (signals.needsArchitecture) passes.push({ id: 'architecture', role: 'architecture reviewer',
focus: ['Module boundaries', 'Dependency direction', 'Cross-layer coupling', 'Pattern consistency'] });
if (signals.hasApi) passes.push({ id: 'api', role: 'api designer',
focus: ['REST conventions', 'Error/status consistency', 'Pagination/filters', 'Versioning'] });
if (signals.hasFrontend) passes.push({ id: 'frontend', role: 'frontend specialist',
focus: ['Component boundaries', 'State management', 'Accessibility', 'Render performance'] });
if (signals.hasBackend) passes.push({ id: 'backend', role: 'backend specialist',
focus: ['Service boundaries', 'Domain logic', 'Concurrency/idempotency', 'Background job safety'] });
if (signals.hasDevops) passes.push({ id: 'devops', role: 'devops reviewer',
focus: ['CI/CD safety', 'Secrets handling', 'Build/test pipelines', 'Deploy config'] });Signal Detection
const signals = {
hasDb: files.some(f => /(db|migrations?|schema|prisma|typeorm|sql)/i.test(f)),
hasApi: files.some(f => /(api|routes?|controllers?|handlers?)/i.test(f)),
hasFrontend: files.some(f => /\.(tsx|jsx|vue|svelte)$/.test(f)),
hasBackend: files.some(f => /(server|backend|services?|domain)/i.test(f)),
hasDevops: files.some(f => /(\.github\/workflows|Dockerfile|k8s|terraform)/i.test(f)),
needsArchitecture: files.length > 20 // 20+ files typically indicates cross-module changes
};Task Prompt Template
You are a ${pass.role}. Review these changed files:
${files.join('\n')}
Focus: ${pass.focus.map(f => `- ${f}`).join('\n')}
Return JSON:
{
"pass": "${pass.id}",
"findings": [{
"file": "path.ts",
"line": 42,
"severity": "critical|high|medium|low",
"description": "Issue",
"suggestion": "Fix",
"confidence": "high|medium|low",
"falsePositive": false
}]
}
Example findings (diverse passes and severities):
// Security - high severity
{ "file": "src/auth/login.ts", "line": 89, "severity": "high",
"description": "Password comparison uses timing-vulnerable string equality",
"suggestion": "Use crypto.timingSafeEqual() instead of ===",
"confidence": "high", "falsePositive": false }
// Code quality - medium severity
{ "file": "src/utils/helpers.ts", "line": 45, "severity": "medium",
"description": "Duplicated validation logic exists in src/api/validators.ts:23",
"suggestion": "Extract to shared lib/validation.ts",
"confidence": "high", "falsePositive": false }
// Performance - low severity
{ "file": "src/config.ts", "line": 12, "severity": "low",
"description": "Magic number 3600 should be named constant",
"suggestion": "const CACHE_TTL_SECONDS = 3600;",
"confidence": "medium", "falsePositive": false }
// False positive example
{ "file": "src/crypto/hash.ts", "line": 78, "severity": "high",
"description": "Non-constant time comparison",
"suggestion": "N/A - intentional for non-secret data",
"confidence": "low", "falsePositive": true }
Report all issues with confidence >= medium. Empty findings array if clean.Aggregation
function aggregateFindings(results) {
const items = [];
for (const {pass, findings = []} of results) {
for (const f of findings) {
items.push({
id: `${pass}:${f.file}:${f.line}:${f.description}`,
pass, ...f,
status: f.falsePositive ? 'false-positive' : 'open'
});
}
}
// Deduplicate by id
const deduped = [...new Map(items.map(i => [i.id, i])).values()];
// Group by severity
const bySeverity = {critical: [], high: [], medium: [], low: []};
deduped.forEach(i => !i.falsePositive && bySeverity[i.severity || 'low'].push(i));
const totals = Object.fromEntries(Object.entries(bySeverity).map(([k, v]) => [k, v.length]));
return {
items: deduped,
bySeverity,
totals,
openCount: Object.values(totals).reduce((a, b) => a + b, 0)
};
}Iteration Loop
Security Note: Fixes are applied by the orchestrator using standard Edit tool permissions. Critical/high severity findings should be reviewed before applying - do not blindly apply LLM-suggested fixes to security-sensitive code. The orchestrator validates each fix against the original issue.
// 5 iterations balances thoroughness vs cost; 1 stall (2 consecutive identical-hash iterations) indicates fixes aren't progressing
const MAX_ITERATIONS = 5, MAX_STALLS = 1;
let iteration = 1, stallCount = 0, lastHash = null;
while (iteration <= MAX_ITERATIONS) {
// 1. Spawn parallel Task agents
const results = await Promise.all(passes.map(pass => Task({
subagent_type: 'general-purpose',
model: 'sonnet',
prompt: /* see template above */
})));
// 2. Aggregate findings
const findings = aggregateFindings(results);
// 3. Check if done
if (findings.openCount === 0) {
workflowState.completePhase({ approved: true, iterations: iteration });
break;
}
// 4. Fix issues (severity order: critical → high → medium → low)
// Orchestrator reviews each suggestion before applying via Edit tool
for (const issue of [...findings.bySeverity.critical, ...findings.bySeverity.high,
...findings.bySeverity.medium, ...findings.bySeverity.low]) {
if (!issue.falsePositive) {
// Read file, locate issue.line, validate suggestion, apply via Edit tool
// For complex fixes, use simple-fixer agent pattern
}
}
// 5. Commit
exec(`git add . && git commit -m "fix: review feedback (iteration ${iteration})"`);
// 6. Post-iteration deslop
Task({ subagent_type: 'deslop-agent', model: 'sonnet' });
// 7. Stall detection
const hash = crypto.createHash('sha256')
.update(JSON.stringify(findings.items.filter(i => !i.falsePositive)))
.digest('hex');
stallCount = hash === lastHash ? stallCount + 1 : 0;
lastHash = hash;
// 8. Check limits
if (stallCount >= MAX_STALLS || iteration >= MAX_ITERATIONS) {
const reason = stallCount >= MAX_STALLS ? 'stall-detected' : 'iteration-limit';
console.log(`[BLOCKED] Review loop ended: ${reason}. Remaining: ${JSON.stringify(findings.totals)}`);
// Ask the user before advancing - do not silently proceed to delivery-validation
const question = `Review loop blocked (${reason}). Open issues remain. How should we proceed?`;
const response = AskUserQuestion({
questions: [{
question,
header: 'Review Blocked',
multiSelect: false,
options: [
{ label: 'Override and proceed', description: 'Advance to delivery-validation with unresolved issues (risky)' },
{ label: 'Abort workflow', description: 'Stop here; open issues must be fixed manually' }
]
}]
});
// AskUserQuestion returns { answers: { [questionText]: selectedLabel } }
const choice = response.answers?.[question] ?? response[question];
if (choice === 'Override and proceed') {
workflowState.completePhase({
approved: false, blocked: true, overridden: true,
reason, remaining: findings.totals
});
} else {
workflowState.failPhase(`Review blocked: ${reason}. ${JSON.stringify(findings.totals)} issues remain.`);
}
break;
}
iteration++;
}Review Queue
Store state at {stateDir}/review-queue-{timestamp}.json:
{
"status": "open|resolved|blocked",
"scope": { "type": "diff", "files": ["..."] },
"passes": ["code-quality", "security"],
"items": [],
"iteration": 0,
"stallCount": 0
}Delete when approved. Keep when blocked for orchestrator inspection.
Cross-Platform Compatibility
This skill uses Task({ subagent_type: ... }) which is Claude Code syntax. For other platforms:
| Platform | Equivalent Syntax |
|---|---|
| Claude Code | Task({ subagent_type: 'general-purpose', model: 'sonnet', prompt: ... }) |
| OpenCode | spawn_agent({ type: 'general-purpose', model: 'sonnet', prompt: ... }) |
| Codex CLI | $agent general-purpose --model sonnet --prompt "..." |
The aggregation and iteration logic remains the same across platforms - only the agent spawning syntax differs.
Related skills
FAQ
What core passes does it always run?
Code quality, security, performance, and test coverage passes run every time, spawned as parallel agents.
How are conditional specialists chosen?
Signal detection over changed files adds passes like database, api, frontend, backend, or devops when matching patterns appear.