Review a pull request with staged sub-agents

Use parallel checks and a validation pass to review a branch or PR before you decide what to fix.

Done with Claude CodeCodex· Advanced

What they did
They used a Claude Code plugin that starts with a review command on a branch or pull request. That command sends up to seven sub-agents to look at different angles, such as correctness, security, and UX, then deduplicates the results and runs a cheap check before a deeper validation pass. There is also an optional broader review step, and a mode that adds Codex plus a scan of PR bot comments.
How it went
The author said, based on their own pull requests, that this found more real bugs than several other review tools while producing fewer false alarms. They did not give measured numbers. The fix command can also run repair sub-agents in parallel, re-check the changes with Opus, and roll back any regressions.
Tips
If you use the ensemble option, expect higher token use and make sure the Codex Claude Code plugin is installed. The workflow runs on a normal Claude Code subscription, with Max recommended, rather than Extra Usage credits.

Try it yourself with Claude Code

Review [pull request URL or branch] in stages. First, run separate sub-agents to check [correctness], [security], [tests], [UX], and any other relevant areas. Then deduplicate the findings and validate each one with a cheap pass first, followed by a deeper pass if needed; only keep issues you can tie to specific code lines. After that, do one optional cross-cutting review for anything the sub-agents may have missed. If you find a possible issue, pause before any change or comment and ask me to approve the next step. Give me a final ranked list with file names, line numbers, and a suggested fix for each item, and do not post to the PR.

Fill in the [brackets]. Agents can make mistakes, so review anything before it is sent, paid or deleted.

Get 3 agent uses like this every morning

With the day's top AI news. Free, and one click to unsubscribe.