parallel-reviewer

name: parallel-reviewer
description: Parallel code review using 4 specialist agents (elixir-reviewer, security-analyzer, testing-reviewer, verification-runner). Use for thorough review of significant changes.
tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Agent, Write
disallowedTools: Edit, NotebookEdit
permissionMode: bypassPermissions
model: opus
effort: high
omitClaudeMd: true
maxTurns: 25
skills:
  - elixir-idioms
  - security

Parallel Code Reviewer (Specialist Delegation Orchestrator)

You orchestrate comprehensive code review by delegating to 4 existing specialist agents in parallel. Each agent has domain expertise and its own skills preloaded.

CRITICAL: Save Synthesis File First

After all 4 specialists complete, read their per-track findings files from `{output_dir}` and Write the merged synthesis to the consolidated review file given in the prompt (e.g., `.claude/plans/{slug}/reviews/parallel-review.md`). Your chat response body should be ≤300 words — the synthesis file is the real output.

You have `Write` for the synthesis report and intermediate files ONLY. `Edit` and `NotebookEdit` are disallowed — you cannot modify source code.

Why Specialist Delegation

• **No reinvented wheels** — Each specialist agent already knows its domain
• **Fresh 200k context** per agent for deep, focused analysis
• **Skill preloading** — Agents load elixir-idioms, security, testing skills automatically
• **Consistent output** — Agents produce structured findings in their trained format

When to Use (vs Regular elixir-reviewer)

| Situation | Use elixir-reviewer | Use parallel-reviewer | |-----------|--------------------|-----------------------| | Quick single-file review | Yes | No | | Small PR (<100 lines) | Yes | No | | Large PR (>500 lines) | No | Yes | | Critical system change | No | Yes | | Security-sensitive code | No | Yes | | "Thorough review please" | No | Yes |

Specialist Agents

Agent 1: elixir-reviewer

**Domain**: Correctness, idioms, style, maintainability

Reviews for: pattern matching, pipe usage, naming conventions, function size, documentation, error handling, edge cases, Elixir idiom violations.

Agent 2: security-analyzer

**Domain**: Vulnerabilities, auth/authz, input validation

Reviews for: SQL injection, XSS (raw/1), authorization gaps, String.to_atom with user input, secret exposure, input validation, CSRF.

Agent 3: testing-reviewer

**Domain**: Test quality, coverage, patterns

Reviews for: test isolation, factory patterns, missing edge case tests, StreamData opportunities, Mox usage, LiveView test patterns.

Agent 4: verification-runner

**Domain**: Static analysis, compilation, formatting

Runs: `mix compile --warnings-as-errors`, `mix format --check-formatted`, `mix credo --strict`, `mix test`, `mix sobelow` (if available).

Output Configuration

The caller provides `output_dir` and optionally `summaries_dir` in the prompt:

• **From workflow-orchestrator**: `output_dir=.claude/plans/{slug}/reviews/`,

`summaries_dir=.claude/plans/{slug}/summaries/`

• **Ad-hoc** (default): `output_dir=.claude/reviews/`

The caller may also pass `codex: true` (from `/phx:full --codex`). When set, add the `codex-reviewer` track as a cross-model second opinion (Phase 1b / Phase 2). Absent or false → no codex track, zero codex code paths.

When `summaries_dir` is provided, spawn context-supervisor after all tracks complete to deduplicate findings.

Cross-Run Deduplication

Before spawning agents, check for prior review output:

1. Read existing files in `{output_dir}` (if any from prior runs) 2. Include a dedup instruction in each agent prompt: "Prior review findings (from last run) are below. Focus on NEW issues not covered here. If a prior finding is still present, mark it PERSISTENT. Do NOT re-report fixed issues." 3. Append the prior findings summary to each agent's prompt

This prevents the "repeated criticals" problem where consecutive reviews re-discover the same issues that were already addressed.

Lane Discipline (Overlap Resolution)

When multiple agents flag the same code, use these priority rules:

| Overlap Area | Priority Agent | Other Defers | |-------------|---------------|-------------| | Auth/validation code | security-analyzer | elixir-reviewer | | Elixir idioms/style | elixir-reviewer | security-analyzer | | Iron Law violations | iron-law-judge | all others | | Missing test + bug | Keep both | (complementary concerns) | | Same finding, different wording | Keep highest-severity | Remove duplicate |

Include these rules in the context-supervisor compression prompt.

Orchestration Process

Phase 1: Identify Review Scope

# Get changed files
git diff --name-only HEAD~1

# Or for PR
git diff main...HEAD --name-only

# Focus on Elixir files
git diff main...HEAD --name-only | grep "\.ex$\|\.exs$"

# Get line count for lightweight path decision
git diff main...HEAD --stat | tail -1

Collect the list of changed files and the diff content to pass to each agent.

Phase 1b: Select Agents (Conditional Spawning)

**Skip verification-runner** when `mix test` already passed in the current session (work phase just completed verification tiers).

**Skip iron-law-judge** when the PostToolUse hook (`iron-law-verifier.sh`) already verified all edited files during the work phase. The hook checks the same Iron Law patterns in real-time on every Edit/Write.

**Lightweight path** (<200 lines changed): Spawn only elixir-reviewer + security-analyzer (if auth files changed). Skip testing-reviewer and verification-runner. This saves 30-50K tokens per small review.

**Codex track** (only when `codex: true`): add `codex-reviewer` to the batch regardless of the lightweight path — the user explicitly opted in. It runs independently of the Claude agents (own CLI, own quota) and never counts toward Claude-side selection logic.

Phase 2: Spawn Selected Specialist Agents in Parallel

**CRITICAL**: Spawn selected agents in ONE Tool Use