plan-swarm-review

Featured

Iterative plan review using multisampling + focused decomposition. Launches parallel independent agents to find issues that single-pass review misses. 4 escalating rounds: broad -> multisample -> focused -> focused+multisample. Use when: "swarm review", "review plan thoroughly", "multisample review", "deep plan review", "plan swarming", "stress test the plan", or before implementing any plan >500 lines or with >3 interacting components. Also use proactively when a large plan is about to be implemented — catch issues before code, not after. Do NOT use to design a multi-agent harness or Generator-Evaluator architecture from scratch; use harness-design for that. Do NOT use to review already-written code/diffs; use deep-review for that (this reviews plans, not implementations).

AI & Automation 138 stars 20 forks Updated today MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 92/100

Stars 20%
71
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Plan Swarm Review Iterative plan hardening through multisampling and focused decomposition. **Core insight**: a single agent misses issues due to attention budget limits. Multiple independent agents reading the same document find different problems (stochastic diversity). Focused decomposition further improves depth per aspect. Iterative fix-then-re-review uncovers issues previously masked by other bugs. Source: deksden (@deksden_notes) — "Plan Swarming" technique, April 2026. Related: Anthropic Harness Design (Generator-Evaluator), deep-review (parallel competency code review). Research backing: - [2502.11027] Sampling diversity in LLM inference — diverse prompts beat identical: +10.8% reasoning, +9.5% code - [2602.09341] AgentAuditor — reasoning tree audit beats majority voting, recovers 65-82% of minority-correct findings - [2602.17875] MultiVer — 4 parallel agents hit 82.7% recall on vulnerability detection (beats fine-tuned models) - [2510.00317] MAVUL — multi-agent vuln detection: +600% vs single-agent - Anthropic Code Review (Mar 2026) — parallel agents raise substantive findings from 16% to 54% ## Modes This skill works in two modes: **Plan mode** (default): review design docs, specs, ADRs, RFCs before implementation. **Code mode**: review code files for bugs and vulnerabilities. Activated when user passes code files instead of a plan, or says "review code", "find vulnerabilities", "security audit". In code mode, aspects shift from plan-oriented (contracts, c...

Details

Author
AnastasiyaW
Repository
AnastasiyaW/claude-code-config
Created
4 months ago
Last Updated
today
Language
Python
License
MIT

Integrates with

Bundled in these plugins

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Solid

plan-swarm

Socratic planning interview for swarm decomposition

15 Updated today
jmylchreest
AI & Automation Listed

plan-review

Review .context/plans/*.md files using 3 independent subagent reviewers: Technical (feasibility, gaps, soundness), Strategic (scope, alignment, priority), and Risk (blind spots, edge cases, failure modes). The skill FIRST asks the user which models to assign to each reviewer — presenting available options based on the user's environment (OpenCode Zen, Go, Claude Code, or BYOK). Each reviewer receives the same plan with a role-specific lens and returns structured feedback. The main agent consolidates all three perspectives. Triggers: 'review this plan', 'audit plan', 'plan review', 'check my plan', 'what's wrong with this plan', 'review all plans', 'plan quality check'. Do NOT use for plans not in .context/plans/, one-off notes, or external documents.

2 Updated 4 days ago
pantheon-org
Code & Development Solid

review-swarm

Local, free, multi-specialist review of a diff: parallel Claude subagents (correctness, security/trust boundaries, data/perf, architecture-altitude, ponytail-simplicity, tests/failure paths), adversarial verification, dedup, ranked file:line report. Use proactively when asked to review, check, or assess a diff, branch, or PR — and after any non-trivial implementation, before the PR. Also on "review-swarm", "swarm review", "deep review". Not for trivial diffs or when asked to fix, not review.

6 Updated 2 days ago
alonbaron