界面已本地化;技能介绍与说明文档按所选语言由 AI 自动翻译,代码、命令、路径和专业术语保留原文,以原作者文档为准。
探索技能
开发与工程 · SKILL.md

multi-reviewer-patterns

multi-reviewer-patterns

【开发与工程】Coordinate parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions with finding deduplication, severity calibration, and consolidated reporting. Use this skill when organizing multi-reviewer code reviews, calibrating finding severity, or consolidating review results.

独立 GitHub 快照 · 自动分类 · 以原作者文档为准

技能说明

GitHub

name: multi-reviewer-patterns description: Coordinate parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions with finding deduplication, severity calibration, and consolidated reporting. Use this skill when organizing multi-reviewer code reviews, calibrating finding severity, or consolidating review results. version: 1.0.2

Multi-Reviewer Patterns

Patterns for coordinating parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions, deduplicating findings, calibrating severity, and producing consolidated reports.

When to Use This Skill

  • Organizing a multi-dimensional code review
  • Deciding which review dimensions to assign
  • Deduplicating findings from multiple reviewers
  • Calibrating severity ratings consistently
  • Producing a consolidated review report

Review Dimension Allocation

Available Dimensions

DimensionFocusWhen to Include
SecurityVulnerabilities, auth, input validationAlways for code handling user input or auth
PerformanceQuery efficiency, memory, cachingWhen changing data access or hot paths
ArchitectureSOLID, coupling, patternsFor structural changes or new modules
TestingCoverage, quality, edge casesWhen adding new functionality
AccessibilityWCAG, ARIA, keyboard navFor UI/frontend changes

Recommended Combinations

ScenarioDimensions
API endpoint changesSecurity, Performance, Architecture
Frontend componentArchitecture, Testing, Accessibility
Database migrationPerformance, Architecture
Authentication changesSecurity, Testing
Full feature reviewSecurity, Performance, Architecture, Testing

Finding Deduplication

When multiple reviewers report issues at the same location:

Merge Rules

  1. Same file:line, same issue — Merge into one finding, credit all reviewers
  2. Same file:line, different issues — Keep as separate findings
  3. Same issue, different locations — Keep separate but cross-reference
  4. Conflicting severity — Use the higher severity rating
  5. Conflicting recommendations — Include both with reviewer attribution

Deduplication Process

For each finding in all reviewer reports:
  1. Check if another finding references the same file:line
  2. If yes, check if they describe the same issue
  3. If same issue: merge, keeping the more detailed description
  4. If different issue: keep both, tag as "co-located"
  5. Use highest severity among merged findings

Severity Calibration

Severity Criteria

SeverityImpactLikelihoodExamples
CriticalData loss, security breach, complete failureCertain or very likelySQL injection, auth bypass, data corruption
HighSignificant functionality impact, degradationLikelyMemory leak, missing validation, broken flow
MediumPartial impact, workaround existsPossibleN+1 query, missing edge case, unclear error
LowMinimal impact, cosmeticUnlikelyStyle issue, minor optimization, naming

Calibration Rules

  • Security vulnerabilities exploitable by external users: always Critical or High
  • Performance issues in hot paths: at least Medium
  • Missing tests for critical paths: at least Medium
  • Accessibility violations for core functionality: at least Medium
  • Code style issues with no functional impact: Low

Consolidated Report Template

## Code Review Report

**Target**: {files/PR/directory}
**Reviewers**: {dimension-1}, {dimension-2}, {dimension-3}
**Date**: {date}
**Files Reviewed**: {count}

### Critical Findings ({count})

#### [CR-001] {Title}

**Location**: `{file}:{line}`
**Dimension**: {Security/Performance/etc.}
**Description**: {what was found}
**Impact**: {what could happen}
**Fix**: {recommended remediation}

### High Findings ({count})

...

### Medium Findings ({count})

...

### Low Findings ({count})

...

### Summary

| Dimension    | Critical | High  | Medium | Low   | Total  |
| ------------ | -------- | ----- | ------ | ----- | ------ |
| Security     | 1        | 2     | 3      | 0     | 6      |
| Performance  | 0        | 1     | 4      | 2     | 7      |
| Architecture | 0        | 0     | 2      | 3     | 5      |
| **Total**    | **1**    | **3** | **9**  | **5** | **18** |

### Recommendation

{Overall assessment and prioritized action items}
我的收藏