Agent skill · software engineering · sickn33
performance-testing-review-multi-agent-review
Review a defined code diff from relevant correctness, authorization and performance perspectives; delegate only when authorized and reproduce findings centrally.
Why this skill is useful
Provides specialized workflows and dynamic agent routing logic for multi-agent code review that the AI wouldn't reliably generate on its own.
What it needs
About 2k tokens when loaded. Last updated 2026-08-07. 44,571 stars on the source repository.
What this skill does
Compatibility and maintenance Compatibility alias of error-debugging-multi-agent-review; use that ID for new references when no existing contract requires this one. The full instructions and support files remain local so existing installations continue to work offline. This is one shared procedure, not an additional capability. Preserve the callable ID when an existing manifest or client configuration uses it. Modified in AAS on 2026-09-05; original metadata and license notices are retained. Coordinate a bounded code review When to Use Review a defined diff or subsystem from several relevant perspectives, such as correctness, authorization and performance. The skill describes a review procedure; it does not install an orchestration engine or prove compliance. Inputs and execution scope Pin repository/base/head, the changed paths, intended behavior and available tests. Use independent agents only if the user authorizes delegation and the host supports it. Otherwise conduct the perspectives sequentially. Do not spawn agents merely because this callable ID contains “multi-agent”. Read-only review is the default; fixes, external posts and deployment stay within the user's actual task authority. Review process 1. Read the complete diff and the directly affected call paths and tests. 2. Choose only perspectives relevant to the change. Give each authorized reviewer a bounded question, owned paths, time/effort limit and expected evidence format. 3. Record findings with exact locations, trigger, consequence and reproduction. Keep hypotheses separate from demonstrated failures; do not invent confidence scores. 4. Reproduce important findings centrally. Deduplicate by root cause, not wording. 5. Resolve disagreement through code or tests. Weighted votes and multiple agents repeating a claim are not evidence of correctness. 6. Return blockers first, then material improvements and untested areas. Preserve the original failing result; a rerun does not erase it. …
How to use it
Reference it in AdaL, Claude Code, Cursor or any coding agent — nothing to install:
@skills sickn33/performance-testing-review-multi-agent-review--3f4260