gsd-review

Cross-AI peer review for phase planning is achieved by triggering independent critiques from multiple AI CLIs like Gemini, Claude, or Codex. This reduces oversight risk by collecting independent feedback instead of relying on a single perspective.

Validating a multi-step phase plan is best done by obtaining independent critiques from external AI CLIs. You can trigger separate reviews for the same phase plan to ensure correctness, completeness, and proper sequencing before execution.

To run a peer review on a specific phase, execute the configured workflow by calling the CLI command with the argument --phase N. You can include specific reviewer flags or use --all to cover available CLIs.

Yes, you can select specific AI models for workflow automation using flag-driven scope control. You can include specific reviewers like Gemini, Claude, or Codex, or use a flag to cover all available CLIs for a given phase.

Cross-AI peer review outputs feedback by collecting responses into a structured REVIEWS.md file. This file contains per-reviewer feedback suitable for follow-up planning and downstream use by phase planning commands.

You need independent critiques for codebase iteration cycles when correctness, completeness, or sequencing is critical. Obtaining critiques from multiple AI CLIs improves planning quality and reduces the risk of missing issues across iterations.