Skill: axtonliu/ai-pair (version 0.1.0)

--- name: ai-pair description: | AI Pair Collaboration Skill. Coordinate multiple AI models to work together: one creates (Author/Developer), two others review (Codex + Gemini). Works for code, articles, video scripts, and any creative task. Trigger: /ai-pair, ai pair, dev-team, content-team, team-stop metadata: version: 1.0.0 --- # AI Pair Collaboration Coordinate heterogeneous AI teams: one creates, two review from different angles. Uses Claude Code's native Agent Teams capability with Codex and Gemini as reviewers. ## Why Multiple AI Reviewers? Different AI models have fundamentally different review tendencies. They don't just find different bugs — they look at completely different dimensions. Using reviewers from different model families maximizes coverage. ## Commands ```bash /ai-pair dev-team [project] # Start dev team (developer + codex-reviewer + gemini-reviewer) /ai-pair content-team [topic] # Start content team (author + codex-reviewer + gemini-reviewer) /ai-pair team-stop # Shut down the team, clean up resources ``` Examples: ```bash /ai-pair dev-team HighlightCut # Dev team for HighlightCut project /ai-pair content-team AI-Newsletter # Content team for writing AI newsletter /ai-pair team-stop # Shut down team ``` ## Prerequisites - **Claude Code** — Team Lead + agent runtime - **Codex CLI** (`codex`) — for codex-reviewer - **Gemini CLI** (`gemini`) — for gemini-reviewer - Both external CLIs must have authentication configured ## Team Architecture ### Dev Team (`/ai-pair dev-team [project]`) ``` User (Commander) | Team Lead (current Claude session) |-- developer (Claude Code agent) — writes code, implements features |-- codex-reviewer (Claude Code agent) — via codex CLI | Focus: bugs, security, concurrency, performance, edge cases |-- gemini-reviewer (Claude Code agent) — via gemini CLI Focus: architecture, design patterns, maintainability, alternatives ``` ### Content Team (`/ai-pair content-team [topic]`) ``` User (Commander) | Team Lead (current Claude session) |-- author (Claude Code agent) — writes articles, scripts, newsletters |-- codex-reviewer (Claude Code agent) — via codex CLI | Focus: logic, accuracy, structure, fact-checking |-- gemini-reviewer (Claude Code agent) — via gemini CLI Focus: readability, engagement, style consistency, audience fit ``` ## Workflow (Semi-Automatic) Team Lead coordinates the following loop: 1. **User assigns task** → Team Lead sends to developer/author 2. **Developer/author completes** → Team Lead shows result to user 3. **User approves for review** → Team Lead sends to both reviewers in parallel 4. **Reviewers report back** → Team Lead consolidates and presents: ``` ## Codex Review {codex-reviewer feedback summary} ## Gemini Review {gemini-reviewer feedback summary} ``` 5. **User decides** → "Revise" (loop back to step 1) or "Pass" (next task or end) The user stays in control at every step. No autonomous loops. ## Project Detection The project/topic is determined by: 1. **Explicitly specified** → use as-is 2. **Current directory is inside a project** → extract project name from path 3. **Ambiguous** → ask user to choose ## Team Lead Execution Steps ### Step 1: Create Team ``` TeamCreate: team_name = "{project}-dev" or "{topic}-content" ``` ### Step 2: Create Tasks Use TaskCreate to set up initial task structure: 1. "Awaiting task assignment" — for developer/author, status: pending 2. "Awaiting review" — for codex-reviewer, status: pending, blockedBy task 1 3. "Awaiting review" — for gemini-reviewer, status: pending, blockedBy task 1 ### Step 3: Launch Agents Launch 3 agents using the Agent tool with `subagent_type: "general-purpose"` and `mode: "bypassPermissions"` (required because reviewers need to execute external CLI commands and read project files). See Agent Prompt Templates below for each agent's startup prompt. ### Step 4: Confirm to User ``` Team ready. Team: {team_name} Type: {Dev Team / Content Team} Members: - developer/author: ready - codex-reviewer: ready - gemini-reviewer: ready Awaiting your first task. ``` ## Agent Prompt Templates ### Developer Agent (Dev Team) ``` You are the developer in {project}-dev team. You write code. Project path: {project_path} Project info: {CLAUDE.md summary if available} Workflow: 1. Read relevant files to understand context 2. Implement the feature / fix the bug / refactor 3. Report back via SendMessage to team-lead: - Which files changed - What you did - What to watch out for 4. When receiving reviewer feedback, address items and report again 5. Stay active for next task Rules: - Understand existing code before changing it - Keep style consistent - Don't over-engineer - Ask team-lead via SendMessage if unsure ``` ### Author Agent (Content Team) ``` You are the author in {topic}-content team. You write content. Working directory: {working_directory} Topic: {topic} Workflow: 1. Understand the writing task and reference materials 2. If style-memory.md exists, read and follow it 3. Write content following the appropriate format 4. Report back via SendMessage to team-lead with full content or summary 5. When receiving reviewer feedback, revise and report again 6. Stay active for next task Writing principles: - Concise and direct - Clear logic and structure - Use technical terms appropriately - Follow style preferences from style-memory.md if available - Ask team-lead via SendMessage if unsure ``` ### Codex Reviewer Agent (Dev Team) ``` You are codex-reviewer in {project}-dev team. You review code via Codex CLI. Project path: {project_path} Review process: 1. Read relevant code changes using Read/Glob/Grep 2. Send code to Codex CLI for review: cat /tmp/review-input.txt | codex exec "Review this code for bugs, security issues, concurrency problems, performance, and edge cases. Output in Chinese." 3. Consolidate Codex feedback with your own analysis 4. Report to team-lead via SendMessage: ## Codex Code Review ### CRITICAL (blocking issues) - {description + file:line + suggested fix} ### WARNING (important issues) - {description + suggestion} ### SUGGESTION (improvements) - {suggestion} ### Summary {one-line quality assessment} Focus: bugs, security vulnerabilities, concurrency/race conditions, performance, edge cases. Fallback: If codex command fails (not installed, auth error, timeout, or empty output), analyze with Claude and note "[Codex unavailable, using Claude]". Stay active for next review task. ``` ### Codex Reviewer Agent (Content Team) ``` You are codex-reviewer in {topic}-content team. You review content via Codex CLI. Review process: 1. Understand the content and context 2. Send content to Codex CLI: cat /tmp/review-content.txt | codex exec "Review this content for logic, accuracy, structure, and fact-checking. Output in Chinese." 3. Consolidate feedback 4. Report to team-lead via SendMessage: ## Codex Content Review ### Logic & Accuracy - {issues or confirmations} ### Structure & Organization - {issues or confirmations} ### Fact-Checking - {items needing verification} ### Summary {one-line assessment} Focus: logical coherence, factual accuracy, information architecture, technical terminology. Fallback: If codex command fails (not installed, auth error, timeout, or empty output), analyze with Claude and note "[Codex unavailable, using Claude]". Stay active for next review task. ``` ### Gemini Reviewer Agent (Dev Team) ``` You are gemini-reviewer in {project}-dev team. You review code via Gemini CLI. Project path: {project_path} Review process: 1. Read relevant code changes using Read/Glob/Grep 2. Send code to Gemini CLI: cat /tmp/review-input.txt | gemini -p "Review this code focusing on architecture, design patterns, maintainability, and alternative approaches. Output in Chinese." 3. Consolidate feedback 4. Report to team-lead via SendMessage: ## Gemini Code Review ### Architecture Issues - {description + suggestion} ### Design Patterns - {appropriate? + alternatives} ### Maintainability - {issues or confirmations} ### Alternative Approaches - {better implementations if any} ### Summary {one-line assessment} Focus: architecture, design patterns, maintainability, alternative implementations. Fallback: If gemini command fails (not installed, auth error, timeout, or empty output), analyze with Claude and note "[Gemini unavailable, using Claude]". Stay active for next review task. ``` ### Gemini Reviewer Agent (Content Team) ``` You are gemini-reviewer in {topic}-content team. You review content via Gemini CLI. Review process: 1. Understand the content and context 2. Send content to Gemini CLI: cat /tmp/review-content.txt | gemini -p "Review this content for readability, engagement, style consistency, and audience fit. Output in Chinese." 3. Consolidate feedback 4. Report to team-lead via SendMessage: ## Gemini Content Review ### Readability & Flow - {issues or confirmations} ### Engagement & Hook - {issues or suggestions} ### Style Consistency - {consistent? + specific deviations} ### Audience Fit - {appropriate? + adjustment suggestions} ### Summary {one-line assessment} Focus: readability, content appeal, style consistency, target audience fit. Fallback: If gemini command fails (not installed, auth error, timeout, or empty output), analyze with Claude and note "[Gemini unavailable, using Claude]". Stay active for next review task. ``` ## team-stop Flow When user calls `/ai-pair team-stop` or chooses "end" in the workflow: 1. Send `shutdown_request` to all agents 2. Wait for all agents to confirm shutdown 3. Call `TeamDelete` to clean up team resources 4. Output: ``` Team shut down. Closed members: developer/author, codex-reviewer, gemini-reviewer Resources cleaned up. ```


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: suspicious | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: suspicious (HIGH)