Back to skills
SkillHub ClubShip Full StackFull Stack

octopus-quick-review

Imported from https://github.com/nyldn/claude-octopus.

Packaged view

This page reorganizes the original catalog entry around fit, installability, and workflow context first. The original raw source lives below.

Stars
1,585
Hot score
99
Updated
March 20, 2026
Overall rating
C4.0
Composite score
4.0
Best-practice grade
F36.0

Install command

npx @skill-hub/cli install nyldn-claude-octopus-octopus-quick-review

Repository

nyldn/claude-octopus

Skill path: skills/octopus-quick-review

Imported from https://github.com/nyldn/claude-octopus.

Open repository

Best for

Primary workflow: Ship Full Stack.

Technical facets: Full Stack.

Target audience: everyone.

License: Unknown.

Original source

Catalog source: SkillHub Club.

Repository owner: nyldn.

This is still a mirrored public skill entry. Review the repository before installing into production workflows.

What it helps with

  • Install octopus-quick-review into Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, or OpenCode workflows
  • Review https://github.com/nyldn/claude-octopus before adding octopus-quick-review to shared team environments
  • Use octopus-quick-review for development workflows

Works across

Claude CodeCodex CLIGemini CLIOpenCode

Favorites: 0.

Sub-skills: 0.

Aggregator: No.

Original source / Raw SKILL.md

---
name: octopus-quick-review
version: 1.0.0
description: Fast pre-commit code review using multi-AI consensus. Use when: Use this skill when the user says "review this code", "check this PR",. "quality check the implementation", "review my changes", or "what's wrong with this code".
---

# Quick Review Skill

Lightweight wrapper that triggers Claude Octopus grasp → tangle workflow for fast, consensus-driven code review.

## When This Skill Activates

Auto-invokes when user says:
- "review this code"
- "check this PR"
- "quality check the implementation"
- "review my changes"
- "what's wrong with this code"

## What It Does

**Two-Phase Workflow:**

1. **Grasp** (Define): Multi-agent consensus on what needs review
   - All agents independently identify issues
   - Synthesize into consensus list of concerns
   - Prioritize by severity and impact

2. **Tangle** (Develop): Parallel implementation review
   - Each agent reviews specific aspects (security, performance, maintainability)
   - Quality gate ensures ≥75% agreement
   - Synthesized findings with actionable recommendations

## Usage

```markdown
User: "Review this authentication module for security issues"

Claude: *Activates octopus-quick-review skill*
        *Runs: ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/orchestrate.sh grasp "Review authentication module"*
        *Then: ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/orchestrate.sh tangle "Implement review findings"*
```

## Implementation

When this skill is invoked, Claude should:

1. **Detect intent**: User wants code review
2. **Invoke grasp**: Get multi-agent consensus on review scope
   ```bash
   ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/orchestrate.sh grasp "[user's review request]"
   ```
3. **Invoke tangle**: Parallel review with quality gates
   ```bash
   ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/orchestrate.sh tangle "[synthesized review scope]"
   ```
4. **Present findings**: Format results for user

## Output Format

```markdown
## Review Summary

**Consensus Issues** (from grasp phase):
1. Authentication bypass in login handler
2. Missing rate limiting
3. Weak password validation

**Detailed Analysis** (from tangle phase):

### Security (Agent: Codex)
- Critical: SQL injection risk in user input
- Medium: Session tokens not rotated

### Performance (Agent: Gemini)
- High: N+1 queries in user lookup
- Low: Inefficient password hashing

**Quality Gate**: PASSED (85% agreement)

**Recommendations**:
1. Implement parameterized queries
2. Add rate limiting middleware
3. Use bcrypt with cost factor 12
```

## Why Use This Instead of Full Embrace?

| Aspect | Quick Review | Full Embrace |
|--------|-------------|--------------|
| Speed | 2-5 min | 5-10 min |
| Phases | 2 (grasp, tangle) | 4 (probe, grasp, tangle, ink) |
| Best For | Code review, PR checks | New features, architecture |
| Depth | Focused consensus | Deep research + validation |

## Configuration

Respects all octopus configuration:
- `--autonomy`: Control quality gate behavior
- `--quality`: Set consensus threshold (default 75%)
- `--provider`: Force specific AI provider
- `--cost-first`: Optimize for speed/cost

## Example Scenarios

### Scenario 1: PR Review
```
User: "Review PR #123 for security issues"
→ Grasp: Identify all security concerns
→ Tangle: Detailed OWASP Top 10 analysis
→ Output: Prioritized security findings
```

### Scenario 2: Performance Check
```
User: "Why is my API so slow?"
→ Grasp: Consensus on performance bottlenecks
→ Tangle: Parallel analysis (DB, network, compute)
→ Output: Optimization recommendations
```

### Scenario 3: Quick Sanity Check
```
User: "Does this look okay?"
→ Grasp: Quick consensus (basic issues only)
→ Tangle: Fast pass with --cost-first
→ Output: Green light or red flags
```

## Related Skills

- **octopus-security** (squeeze workflow) - For adversarial security testing
- **octopus-research** (probe workflow) - For deep investigation
- **Full embrace** - For complete Double Diamond workflow

## Technical Notes

- Uses existing grasp/tangle commands from orchestrate.sh
- No new code required - pure workflow coordination
- Leverages quality gates for reliability
- Session recovery supported (can resume if interrupted)
octopus-quick-review | SkillHub