Stats
Actions
Tags
Help us improve
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
From swarm
Resolves stuck review findings via a structured put-up-or-concede exchange after arbitration. Enforces decided points, accepts concrete evidence to reopen.
npx claudepluginhub dheerg/swarms --plugin swarmHow this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/swarm:resolve-disputeThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
A review finding is stuck. Structure its resolution in three steps.
Performs symmetric two-AI peer reviews using OpenAI Codex CLI: independent blind reviews followed by structured per-issue debate for plans, code reviews, architecture, and recommendations.
Verifies code review findings with an independent second opinion. Supports dismiss (false positive check), confirm, and clarify intents with automated or human-gated verdicts.
Evaluates code review findings by verifying claims against the codebase and HOTL contracts before implementing changes. Use when responding to any review feedback.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
A review finding is stuck. Structure its resolution in three steps.
Step 1 — Frame the dispute. Identify and state aloud:
Step 2 — Send the reviewer this message, substituting [finding] with the actual finding:
Your finding — [finding] — was arbitrated. To keep it open, you must provide ONE of: (a) A concrete failure scenario: specific inputs or conditions that produce wrong behavior (b) A source citation: file, line number, and what it shows (c) A direct counterexample to the arbitration reasoning
One response. No response counts as concession. After that, the facilitator rules and the finding is DECIDED.
Step 3 — Rule and tag.
After the reviewer responds:
DECIDED findings cannot be re-raised without new substance. This enforces the existing "Don't regurgitate decided points" rule.
What this skill must not do: