Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add ThrownLemon/claude-code-plugins --skill multi-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ThrownLemon/claude-code-pluginsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/thrownlemon/claude-code-plugins/multi-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/thrownlemon/claude-code-plugins/multi-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thrownlemon/claude-code-plugins/multi-review/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/thrownlemon/claude-code-plugins/multi-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thrownlemon/claude-code-plugins/multi-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00031 | $0.00582 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00233 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00116 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00058 |
Grade A, and why
multi-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
Multi-AI Code Review Skill
When the user wants a comprehensive code review using multiple AI perspectives, delegate to the review-coordinator subagent.
When to Use
Use this skill when the user:
- Asks for a "multi-AI" or "multi-perspective" review
- Wants to compare what different AI tools think about their code
- Asks for "consensus" or "cross-checking"
- Mentions Claude + Gemini + Codex reviewing together
- Wants a "comprehensive" or "full project" review
- Asks what different AIs think about their code
Default Behavior
- CLIs: All three (claude, gemini, codex)
- Focus: Comprehensive (all categories)
- Timeout: 10 minutes per CLI
What the Subagent Does
The review-coordinator subagent will:
-
Validate Prerequisites
- Check which CLIs are installed
- Report any missing CLIs with install instructions
- Continue with available CLIs
-
Execute Parallel Reviews
- Run all available CLIs simultaneously
- Monitor for completion or timeout
- Handle failures gracefully
-
Aggregate Results
- Parse findings from each CLI
- Match similar issues using fuzzy matching
- Categorize by agreement level
-
Present Comparison Report
- Consensus findings (all agree) - highest confidence
- Majority findings (2+ agree) - likely valid
- Unique findings (1 found) - needs human judgment
Example User Requests
- "Run a multi-AI review of this codebase"
- "What do Claude, Gemini, and Codex think about my code?"
- "Get a consensus review of my project"
- "Compare AI opinions on this code"
- "Do a comprehensive code review"
- "Cross-check my code with multiple AIs"
Use the review-coordinator subagent to handle the review workflow.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 76 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 4c0d81c0e4e3
multi-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository ThrownLemon/claude-code-plugins (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 582 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Structured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.
omh-code-review
This is an OMH code-review workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
asplos-writing-style
Use when drafting or revising ASPLOS prose — engineering the first two pages that rapid review actually reads, stating the cross-layer insight as one quotable sentence, structuring per-layer mechanism sections, writing bounded claims, and fitting everything into 11 self-contained pages that include figures and…
explore-unknowns
Guide the user through a quadrant walk that maps the unknowns of a task — open by listing the known knowns, then work through known unknowns, unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns one stage at a time, ending with a complete four-quadrant map in the user's hands. Use when a request is ambiguous or underspecified, the…
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…