council-review

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Council Review

委员会评审

Run Codex and Claude's own

/review

in parallel, then cross-validate and synthesize into one unified report — like a review board where two reviewers examine the code independently, and Claude as lead reviewer delivers the final opinion.

并行运行Codex和Claude自带的

/review

能力，随后交叉验证并合成为一份统一报告——就像评审委员会中两名评审员独立审查代码，再由作为主评审的Claude给出最终意见。

Prerequisites

前置要求

Codex CLI: Install with
```
npm i -g @openai/codex
```
, authenticate with
```
codex login
```

If only one CLI is installed, fall back to the available reviewer with a warning — the review still has value with fewer perspectives, so don't fail entirely.

Codex CLI: 执行
```
npm i -g @openai/codex
```
安装，通过
```
codex login
```
完成认证

如果仅安装了其中一个CLI，回退到可用的评审工具并给出警告——即使视角更少，评审结果仍然有价值，因此不要直接终止运行。

When to Use

适用场景

Reviewing uncommitted changes before committing
Auditing a branch diff before opening a PR
Reviewing a specific commit for regressions

提交前评审未提交的变更
开PR前审计分支diff
评审特定提交是否存在回归问题

When NOT to Use

不适用场景

Reviewing documentation, markdown, or non-code files
Trivial single-line changes where a full council review would be overkill

评审文档、markdown或非代码文件
无关紧要的单行变更，完整的委员会评审属于大材小用

Workflow

工作流程

Do not read script source code. Run scripts directly and use

--help

for usage.

不要读取脚本源代码。直接运行脚本，使用

--help

参数查看用法。

Step 1: Determine Review Scope

步骤1：确定评审范围

If the scope is not already clear, use AskUserQuestion to ask:

Uncommitted changes (default) — staged, unstaged, and untracked changes
Branch diff — compare current branch against a base branch
Specific commit — audit a single changeset

如果范围不明确，使用AskUserQuestion询问用户：

未提交变更（默认）——暂存、未暂存和未跟踪的变更
分支diff——将当前分支与基准分支对比
特定提交——审计单个变更集

Step 2: Run Both Reviews in Parallel

步骤2：并行运行两项评审

Both reviewers read the same diff independently — neither depends on the other's output. Launch them both at once in a single message to eliminate sequential wait time.

Scripts are in

scripts/

relative to this skill's directory and enforce the correct model and read-only mode internally. Run

<script> --help

for full usage.

两名评审员独立读取同一份diff——互不依赖对方的输出。在同一条消息中同时启动两项任务，消除串行等待时间。

脚本位于本技能目录下的

scripts/

文件夹中，内部已配置正确的模型和只读模式。运行

<script> --help

查看完整用法。

Codex —

scripts/codex-review.py

(background Bash task)

Codex —

scripts/codex-review.py

（后台Bash任务）

Launch as a background Bash task (

run_in_background: true

). Codex CLI may take up to 30 minutes. When it completes, use the

Read

tool on the

output-file

path from the notification to retrieve the review.

bash

python3 scripts/codex-review.py uncommitted
python3 scripts/codex-review.py branch --base main
python3 scripts/codex-review.py commit <SHA>

作为后台Bash任务启动（

run_in_background: true

）。Codex CLI最多可能需要30分钟运行时间。运行完成后，使用

Read

工具读取通知中给出的

output-file

路径获取评审结果。

bash

python3 scripts/codex-review.py uncommitted
python3 scripts/codex-review.py branch --base main
python3 scripts/codex-review.py commit <SHA>

Claude —

/review

skill (background Agent)

Claude —

/review

技能（后台Agent）

Launch a background Agent (

run_in_background: true

) to run

/review

on the same scope. Prompt the agent to invoke the

/review

skill (via the Skill tool) and return its complete findings. The agent's output arrives directly in its completion notification.

启动后台Agent（

run_in_background: true

）在相同范围运行

/review

。提示Agent（通过Skill工具）调用

/review

技能并返回完整结果。Agent的输出会直接返回到其完成通知中。

Step 3: Cross-Validate Findings

步骤3：交叉验证评审结果

Once both reviews have returned, cross-validate:

Validate external findings — For each finding from Codex:
- Confirm — Claude independently agrees the issue exists and is correctly described.
- Dispute — Claude believes the finding is a false positive or incorrectly categorized. Note the reasoning.
- Enhance — The issue exists but the explanation or suggested fix can be improved. Provide the improved version.
Add Claude's own findings — Include any issues from
```
/review
```
that Codex didn't catch.

两项评审都返回结果后，进行交叉验证：

验证外部评审结果——针对Codex给出的每一项发现：
- 确认——Claude也独立认可该问题存在且描述准确
- 存疑——Claude认为该发现是误报或分类错误，记录原因
- 优化——问题确实存在，但解释或建议修复方案可以优化，提供优化后的版本
补充Claude的自有发现——加入
```
/review
```
发现的、Codex未检出的所有问题

Step 4: Synthesize into Unified Report

步骤4：合成统一报告

After your own review and validation are complete, merge, deduplicate, and rewrite all findings into one coherent report as if written by a single reviewer. Do not copy-paste or concatenate raw outputs.

Load

references/output-format.md

for the report template. Load

references/merge-rules.md

for how to reconcile findings across reviewers.

完成自有评审和验证后，合并、去重、重写所有发现，形成一份连贯的报告，就像由单一评审员撰写的一样。不要直接复制粘贴或拼接原始输出。

加载

references/output-format.md

获取报告模板，加载

references/merge-rules.md

了解如何协调不同评审员的发现。

Rules

规则

Run both reviewers in parallel — Codex and
```
/review
```
are independent reads of the same diff. Running them concurrently instead of sequentially saves the entire
```
/review
```
execution time.
Use the same review scope for both reviewers — comparing different scopes would make deduplication meaningless.
Wait for both reviews to complete before cross-validation — the council's value depends on comparing complete outputs.
Write one unified opinion — the report should read as a single reviewer's assessment. Never structure findings by reviewer (no "Codex found..." sections).
Sort findings by priority — P0 → P1 → P2 → P3 → P4.
Exclude low-confidence findings — If Claude disputes an external finding or evidence is purely circumstantial, omit it from the report. The council's value is cross-validation; findings that fail it are noise.
Always use the wrapper script for Codex — do not call
```
codex
```
CLI directly, because the script sets the correct model and read-only mode.
Suppress intermediate outputs — Do not display raw Codex or
```
/review
```
outputs to the user. Running
```
/review
```
in a subagent keeps its output out of the main conversation naturally. The only review output the user should see is the final unified report.
Never use
TaskOutput
for background tasks —
```
TaskOutput
```
cannot find background Bash task IDs and will fail. Use the
```
Read
```
tool on the
```
output-file
```
path from the completion notification instead. For background Agents, read the result directly from the completion notification.
If a reviewer fails at runtime — stop the review, report the error to the user, and do not produce a council report. A single-reviewer result lacks cross-validation and should not be presented as a council review.
Do not poll or probe background tasks — Do not read output files, check process status, resume agents, or run any commands while waiting for background tasks. End your response after launching them. You will be notified automatically when each task completes.

并行运行两个评审工具——Codex和
```
/review
```
独立读取同一份diff。并行运行而非串行运行可以节省整个
```
/review
```
的执行时间。
两个评审工具使用相同的评审范围——对比不同范围会让去重失去意义。
交叉验证前等待两项评审全部完成——委员会评审的价值建立在对比完整输出的基础上。
输出统一的评审意见——报告读起来应该是单一评审员的评估结果，不要按评审员区分发现（不要出现「Codex发现...」这类章节）。
按优先级排序发现——P0 → P1 → P2 → P3 → P4。
排除低置信度发现——如果Claude对外部发现存疑，或是证据完全不充分，从报告中删除该内容。委员会评审的价值在于交叉验证，未通过验证的发现属于无效信息。
始终使用Codex的封装脚本——不要直接调用
```
codex
```
CLI，因为脚本已经设置了正确的模型和只读模式。
隐藏中间输出——不要向用户展示原始的Codex或
```
/review
```
输出。在子Agent中运行
```
/review
```
可以自然避免其输出出现在主会话中，用户唯一能看到的评审输出就是最终的统一报告。
永远不要对后台任务使用
TaskOutput
——
```
TaskOutput
```
无法获取后台Bash任务ID，会运行失败。对于后台Bash任务，使用
```
Read
```
工具读取完成通知中的
```
output-file
```
路径；对于后台Agent，直接从完成通知中读取结果。
如果某一个评审工具运行时出错——停止评审，向用户上报错误，不要生成委员会评审报告。单一评审员的结果缺少交叉验证，不应作为委员会评审结果呈现。
不要轮询或探测后台任务——等待后台任务完成期间，不要读取输出文件、检查进程状态、恢复Agent或是运行任何命令。启动任务后直接结束回复，每个任务完成后你会自动收到通知。

council-review

Original

Translation

Council Review

委员会评审

Prerequisites

前置要求

When to Use

适用场景

When NOT to Use

不适用场景

Workflow

工作流程

Step 1: Determine Review Scope

步骤1：确定评审范围

Step 2: Run Both Reviews in Parallel

步骤2：并行运行两项评审

Codex —
`scripts/codex-review.py`
(background Bash task)

Codex —
`scripts/codex-review.py`
（后台Bash任务）

Claude —
`/review`
skill (background Agent)

Claude —
`/review`
技能（后台Agent）

Step 3: Cross-Validate Findings

步骤3：交叉验证评审结果

Step 4: Synthesize into Unified Report

步骤4：合成统一报告

Rules

规则

council-review

Original

Translation

Council Review

委员会评审

Prerequisites

前置要求

When to Use

适用场景

When NOT to Use

不适用场景

Workflow

工作流程

Step 1: Determine Review Scope

步骤1：确定评审范围

Step 2: Run Both Reviews in Parallel

步骤2：并行运行两项评审

Codex — scripts/codex-review.py (background Bash task)

Codex — scripts/codex-review.py（后台Bash任务）

Claude — /review skill (background Agent)

Claude — /review技能（后台Agent）

Step 3: Cross-Validate Findings

步骤3：交叉验证评审结果

Step 4: Synthesize into Unified Report

步骤4：合成统一报告

Rules

规则

Codex —
`scripts/codex-review.py`
(background Bash task)

Codex —
`scripts/codex-review.py`
（后台Bash任务）

Claude —
`/review`
skill (background Agent)

Claude —
`/review`
技能（后台Agent）