Skip to content

Cross-agent review

Have a second agent review the first agent's work before you do. Especially useful across runtimes — a Claude Code session writing a feature, a Codex session reviewing it for security or simplification.

The flow

  1. Builder peer finishes a chunk of work and commits or stages it.
  2. Builder calls ask("reviewer", "review the diff on feat/foo for the auth path").
  3. Reviewer peer reads the diff (git diff, gh pr diff), runs whatever checks it cares about, and acks back with findings.
  4. Builder addresses the findings in a follow-up turn.

Why two agents

The second agent has no commitment to the implementation. It hasn't spent five turns convincing itself the current approach is fine. That neutrality is the value — not raw capability difference.

Pair runtimes for an additional check:

  • Claude Code + Codex — different model lineages catch different things.
  • Claude Code + Gemini — Gemini tends to flag different patterns.
  • Same runtime, fresh session — works too; the new session loads the diff cold.

Concrete prompts

For the builder:

ask("reviewer", "I just pushed feat/auth-rework. Review the diff at
  https://github.com/me/repo/pull/42 with a security pass:
  authentication, authorization, session handling. Skim everything else.")

For the reviewer (no special prompt needed — repowire-aware agents will run the review on receipt). Tell the reviewer what to focus on, not just "review this."

Mark it reviewed

The reviewer can call mark_reviewed(pr_url) after the pass. The PR drops off the reviewer's review_queue at the recorded SHA. If the builder pushes new commits later, the PR resurfaces as re-review-suggested.

See also