Skip to content
Back to skills

Multi Model Verification

ASecurity

Parallel code verification using multiple models with severity classification

  • 43 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added September 9, 2026
code-qualityapisecurityperformancedocumentation

Works with

  • api

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 9, 2026

npx -y skills add baekenough/oh-my-customcode --skill multi-model-verification --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Multi Model Verification?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Multi Model Verification
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/baekenough-multi-model-verification/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/baekenough-multi-model-verification)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: multi-model-verification
description: Parallel code verification using multiple models with severity classification
scope: core
version: 1.0.0
user-invocable: false
---

# Multi-Model Verification

Parallel code verification using multiple AI models for comprehensive quality assurance. Each model focuses on a different aspect, and results are aggregated with severity classification.

## Background

Inspired by Pi Coding Agent Workflow Extension's multi-model verification pattern. Instead of a single reviewer, multiple models verify code simultaneously, each with specialized focus areas.

## Verification Roles

| Model | Role | Focus Areas |
|-------|------|-------------|
| `opus` | Architecture Reviewer | Design patterns, separation of concerns, extensibility, security architecture |
| `sonnet` | Code Quality Reviewer | Logic correctness, error handling, edge cases, performance patterns |
| `haiku` | Style & Convention Reviewer | Naming conventions, formatting, documentation, code organization |

## Severity Classification

| Severity | Description | Action Required |
|----------|-------------|-----------------|
| CRITICAL | Bugs, security vulnerabilities, data loss risks | Must fix before merge |
| WARNING | Code smells, suboptimal patterns, missing error handling | Should fix, justify if skipped |
| INFO | Style suggestions, minor improvements, alternative approaches | Optional improvement |

## Workflow

### Prerequisites
- None. This skill runs fully without Agent Teams — the three reviewers spawn as parallel Agent tool calls (see "Agent Tool Fallback" below).
- Agent Teams mode is used only when available: `CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=1` **AND** `TeamCreate` present in the tool list. The env var alone is NOT sufficient, and `SendMessage` presence is not evidence of Teams (see R018 Detection).

### Execution Flow

1. **Input**: File path(s) or diff to verify
2. **Spawn Parallel Reviewers**:
   - `Agent(opus)` → Architecture & design review
   - `Agent(sonnet)` → Code quality & correctness review
   - `Agent(haiku)` → Style & convention review
3. **Collect Results**: Each reviewer returns findings with severity
4. **Aggregate**: Merge and deduplicate findings
5. **Report**: Unified report sorted by severity

### Agent Teams Mode

When Agent Teams is available, create a verification team:

```
TeamCreate("verification-team")
├── architect-reviewer (opus) → Architecture review
├── quality-reviewer (sonnet) → Code quality review
└── style-reviewer (haiku) → Style review
```

Members communicate findings via SendMessage for cross-cutting concerns.

### Agent Tool Fallback

When Agent Teams is unavailable, spawn parallel agents:

```
[1] Agent(general-purpose):opus → Architecture review
[2] Agent(general-purpose):sonnet → Code quality review
[3] Agent(general-purpose):haiku → Style & convention review
```

## Output Format

```
## Multi-Model Verification Report

### Summary
- Files reviewed: {count}
- Findings: {critical} CRITICAL, {warning} WARNING, {info} INFO
- Reviewers: opus (architecture), sonnet (quality), haiku (style)

### CRITICAL
[opus] {file}:{line} — {description}
[sonnet] {file}:{line} — {description}

### WARNING
[sonnet] {file}:{line} — {description}
[haiku] {file}:{line} — {description}

### INFO
[haiku] {file}:{line} — {description}

### Consensus
Issues flagged by 2+ reviewers:
- {file}:{line} — {description} (flagged by: opus, sonnet)
```

## Integration

- Works with `dev-review` skill as an enhanced verification mode
- Integrates with `structured-dev-cycle` skill at the "Verify Implementation" stage
- Compatible with R009 (parallel execution) and R018 (Agent Teams) rules

## Configuration

| Parameter | Default | Description |
|-----------|---------|-------------|
| `models` | `[opus, sonnet, haiku]` | Models to use for verification |
| `severity_filter` | `all` | Minimum severity to report (`critical`, `warning`, `all`) |
| `consensus_threshold` | `2` | Number of reviewers needed for consensus flag |
| `include_suggestions` | `true` | Include INFO-level suggestions |

## When to Use

| Scenario | Recommended |
|----------|-------------|
| Pre-merge review of critical code | Yes |
| Architecture changes | Yes |
| Security-sensitive code | Yes |
| Simple formatting changes | No (use single reviewer) |
| Rapid prototyping | No (overhead too high) |

## Cost Awareness

Multi-model verification uses 3x the tokens of a single review. Reserve for:
- Critical path code changes
- Security-sensitive modifications
- Architecture decisions
- Pre-release verification

When spawning agents via the Agent tool during this skill's execution, always pass `mode: "bypassPermissions"`. The Agent tool default (`acceptEdits`) overrides agent frontmatter `permissionMode`, causing permission prompts during unattended execution.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…