agentsclimarketplace

Swarm review

Skill grimoire-rs/grimoire/.claude/skills/swarm-review

Package manager for AI-agent config. grim installs, updates, and publishes skills, rules, agents, MCP servers, and bundles into Claude Code, Copilot, Cursor, Codex, Gemini, Zed, Amp, Kiro, Junie, and opencode — pinned by digest in a lockfile. Storage is any OCI registry; there is no service to run.

Install
npx -y skills add grimoire-rs/grimoire --skill swarm-review

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 6 stars6 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Use for branch, PR, or diff review before landing on main. Tier (`low | auto | high | max`) scales breadth from single reviewer to adversarial panel with architect + SOTA-gap + Codex cross-model gate. Triggers: "review", "/swarm-review", pre-merge checks.

SKILL.md

8.6 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Adversarial Reviewer — Tiered

Thin dispatch layer. Phase plans live in sibling tier files (tier-low.md, tier-high.md, tier-max.md). This file parse args, resolve baseline, classify diff (classify.md), resolve overlays (overlays.md), optionally gate on meta-plan approval, then hand off to matching tier file. Shared content (worker table, adversarial protocol, output format, constraints) stay here — perspective-by- perspective execution lives in tier files.

Argument syntax

/swarm-review [tier] <target> [--flags]
  • tier (optional): low | auto | high | max. Default auto.
  • target (optional): branch name; PR ref (<N> / #<N> / PR <N> / pull/<N> / full GitHub PR URL); empty → current branch HEAD.
  • flags (Grimoire convention: flags before positional):
    • --base=<git-ref> — diff baseline; default main. When target resolves to PR, inferred from gh pr view --json baseRefName unless user pass --base explicit.
    • --breadth=minimal|full|adversarial — Stage 2 perspective breadth
    • --reviewer=haiku|sonnet|opus — model for worker-reviewer
    • --doc-reviewer=haiku|sonnet — model for worker-doc-reviewer
    • --rca=on|off — Five Whys systemic-fix analysis
    • --codex / --no-codex — cross-model adversarial pass (code-diff scope)
    • --codex-model=luna|terra|sol — Codex model for cross-model pass (default per tier: high=terra, max=sol; luna if forced at low)
    • --dry-run — meta-plan preview via EnterPlanMode
    • --form — structured AskUserQuestion form; implies --dry-run

--base is pipeline input, not axis. Feeds classifier as diff baseline for whole run. Overlays (breadth, rca, codex) are single-axis pipeline adjustments on top of chosen tier.

Workflow

1. Parse arguments and resolve target

Detect target (ordered, first match wins):

  1. Full GitHub PR URL
  2. PR <N> / pull/<N> → PR
  3. #<N> or bare integer → probe PR via mcp__github__pull_request_read
  4. Branch name — verify via git rev-parse --verify <name>
  5. Empty → current branch HEAD

PR metadata (labels, base ref, title, body) feeds both baseline resolution and classifier. On fetch fail, fall back to free-text treatment (match /swarm-plan convention).

2. Resolve the baseline

  • User pass --base=<ref> → use verbatim (user wins).
  • Else target is PR → use gh pr view <N> --json baseRefName -q .baseRefName.
  • Else default main.

Fast-fail when git rev-parse --verify <base> fails — print remediation (did you mean origin/main?) and stop. Empty diff → report "nothing to review" and exit clean.

3. Classify (only when tier=auto)

Read classify.md. Compute diff metrics once (git diff <base>...HEAD --name-only for files, --shortstat for lines). Apply tier signals (size + subsystems + structural markers + PR labels). Produce candidate tier + confidence flag + overlay set. When signals split across adjacent tiers, mark low-confidence — meta-plan gate in step 5 resolve it. No mid-flow AskUserQuestion.

4. Resolve overlays

Final config = tier defaults (overlays.md per-tier table) + classifier overlays + user flag overrides. User flags always win.

5. Meta-plan gate (single consolidated approval point)

Fire when ANY of: --dry-run, --form, tier resolved to max, or low-confidence classification. Only user-prompt point.

Write .claude/state/plans/meta-plan_review_[target].md with: Classification (tier + rationale + diff metrics snapshot), Baseline (source: user-flag / PR-base / default), Overlays (with rationale), Workers per perspective, Estimated cost, Not Doing (no auto-fixes, no commits).

Approval UI (always single interaction):

  • Default: EnterPlanMode with meta-plan path; resume on approve. Fall back to AskUserQuestion Approve/Edit/Cancel if skill resume after ExitPlanMode unreliable in practice.
  • --form: ONE AskUserQuestion call with ≤4 batched axis questions (Tier / Breadth / RCA / Codex), first option "Recommended".

On reject: re-draft with rejection rationale and re-present once.

6. Announce final config (always)

Swarm review
  Tier:       high                             (auto — 8 files, 240 lines, 1 subsystem)
  Baseline:   main                             (default)
  Target:     HEAD (branch: soraka)
  Overlays:   breadth=full, rca=on, codex=off  (tier default)
  Workers:    Stage 1 (2 parallel), Stage 2 (4 parallel)
  Codex diff review: off
  Proceed? (Ctrl+C to abort; re-run with explicit tier to override)

7. Dispatch to tier file

Read matching tier-{low,high,max}.md and execute its phase plan.

Worker assignment (shared across tiers)

See .claude/rules/workflow-swarm.md for worker types, models, tools, focus modes. Tier files select subset of these perspectives.

PerspectiveWorker / focusTier use
Spec-complianceworker-reviewer (spec-compliance, phase: post-implementation)all
Compatibility (breaking-change gate)worker-reviewer (compatibility)all — dedicated Stage 1 reviewer at high/max; anchor set folded into the single reviewer at low
Test coverageworker-reviewer (quality, lens: test-coverage)high, max
Qualityworker-reviewer (quality)all
Securityworker-reviewer (security)high (security paths), max
Performanceworker-reviewer (performance)high (hot paths), max
Architectureworker-architectmax (+ adversarial)
Documentationworker-doc-reviewerhigh, max
CLI UXworker-reviewer (quality, lens: cli-ux)max (+ adversarial)
SOTAworker-researchermax (+ adversarial)
Cross-modelcodex-adversary (code-diff)high (when --codex fires), max (mandatory)

Max concurrent workers: 8 (per workflow-swarm.md).

Adversarial protocol & output format

Adversarial questioning anchors ("What if this assumption is wrong?", "Under what conditions would this fail?", "What edge cases weren't considered?") apply at every tier. Root-cause Five-Whys analysis is tier-gated via rca axis (see overlays.md).

Output skeleton — tier files add or remove Stage 2 sections per breadth they run. Every tier produces:

## Code Review: [target]
### Summary
- Verdict: Approved | Needs Work | Request Changes
- Tier / Baseline / Diff: N files, +L / -L lines, S subsystems
### Stage 1 — Correctness (spec-compliance, test-coverage)
### Stage 2 — [perspectives run at this tier]
### Cross-Model Adversarial (Codex)  # if --codex fired
### Root-Cause Analysis               # if rca=on
### Deferred Findings (human judgment required)

Verdict: Approve (Block/High resolved or deferred with reasoning), Needs Work (Warn-tier present), Request Changes (unresolved Block-tier / security / any breaking change — prohibited during the 1.0.0 stabilization freeze / missing tests / arch violations).

Constraints

  • NO auto-fixing — review read-only; actionable findings reported, not committed
  • NO approving with unresolved Block-tier findings
  • NO nitpicking style when using rustfmt
  • NO mid-flow AskUserQuestion during classification
  • NO exceeding 8 parallel workers
  • ALWAYS reference specific files and lines
  • ALWAYS suggest alternatives, not just problems
  • ALWAYS classify every finding as actionable or deferred
  • ALWAYS stay within diff scope (<base>...HEAD)

Plan Status block (mutate on round entry + verdict)

Mutate the plan's ## Status block: flip Step to /swarm-review → round N on each round entry; on verdict, set awaiting /finalize (Approve) or awaiting /swarm-execute (review-fix loop) (Needs Work / Request Changes); bump Last update. Skip silently when no current_plan.md / no Status block. Full mutation table → meta-ai-config.md "Plan Status Protocol".

Handoff

  • To /swarm-execute: when actionable findings exist and user want them fixed. /swarm-execute runs Review-Fix Loop.
  • To /builder: with remediation task list for specific finding.
  • To /doc-writer: with gap report from worker-doc-reviewer.
  • To /architect: for architectural concerns requiring ADR.

$ARGUMENTS

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.