← Back to Create Review
/createreview
AI Board Review Workflow for Critical Analysis
Executive Summary
The /createreview command performs a critical analysis of an existing approach,
technology choice, or architecture decision. It challenges assumptions, compares against industry best practices,
and focuses on simplification opportunities.
Use this before committing to a complex solution. The multi-AI review often reveals simpler alternatives
that achieve the same goals with fewer moving parts, lower maintenance burden, and better alignment with
what leading open-source projects are doing.
⚙
Simplicity First
Fewer moving parts = fewer failure points
🔧
Consolidated Tooling
Prefer multi-purpose over single-purpose
🏆
Industry Standards
What are top companies doing?
❓
Challenge Assumptions
Question every dependency
flowchart LR
subgraph Input
A[Topic/Approach]
end
subgraph "Analysis Phase"
B[Document Current]
C[Claude Review]
D[Gemini Review]
E[Codex Review]
end
subgraph "Synthesis"
F[Compare and Score]
G[Devil's Advocate]
H[Final Recommendation]
end
A --> B --> C
C --> D & E
D & E --> F --> G --> H
style A fill:#f472b6,color:#1a1a2e
style H fill:#4ade80,color:#1a1a2e
style C fill:#d97757,color:#fff
style D fill:#4285f4,color:#fff
style E fill:#10b981,color:#fff
1
Name Approval
Confirm review name
→
→
3
Claude Review
Initial analysis
→
4
AI Board
Gemini + Codex
→
5
Synthesize
Best approach
→
6
Challenge
Devil's advocate
→
Three Perspectives on Simplification
Claude (Orchestrator)
- Complexity audit
- What can be removed?
- Redundant components?
- 2-3 simpler alternatives
Gemini (Systems Thinking)
- High-level reasoning
- Hidden coupling points
- Top company practices
- "Boring technology" choices
Codex (Technical Deep-Dive)
- Technical soundness
- Edge cases & failures
- Tool maintenance burden
- Concrete alternatives
sequenceDiagram
participant U as User
participant C as Claude
participant G as Gemini
participant X as Codex
participant F as Files
U->>C: /createreview {topic}
C->>U: Propose review name
U->>C: Approve name
Note over C,F: Step 2: Document Current State
C->>F: {name}.md (current approach)
Note over C,F: Step 3: Claude Review
C->>F: {name}.claude.md
Note over C,X: Step 4: AI Board Review (Parallel)
par Gemini Review
C->>G: Review with simplicity focus
G->>F: {name}.gemini.md
and Codex Review
C->>X: Review with technical focus
X->>F: {name}.codex.md
end
Note over C,F: Step 5: Synthesis
C->>F: {name}.final.md (scorecard)
Note over C,F: Step 6: Devil's Advocate
C->>F: {name}.final.md (risks added)
Note over C,F: Step 7: Executive Presentation
C->>F: HTML site deployed
C->>U: Final recommendation
Simplicity Scorecard (Sample Output)
| Approach |
Complexity |
Tools |
Maintenance |
Verdict |
| Current |
8/10 |
12 |
High |
Replace |
| Alternative A |
4/10 |
5 |
Low |
Recommended |
| Alternative B |
6/10 |
7 |
Medium |
Consider |
Devil's Advocate Pass (Step 6)
Before finalizing, the recommendation faces critical questions:
"What could go wrong with this recommendation?"
"What are we still missing?"
"Is this truly simpler or just different?"
"Would a pragmatic senior engineer agree?"
Generated Artifacts
{name}.md
Current state documented
{name}.claude.md
Claude's review
{name}.gemini.md
Gemini's review
{name}.codex.md
Codex's review
{name}.final.md
Synthesis + scorecard
HTML Site
Executive presentation
When to Use /createreview
- Before committing to a complex architecture
- Questioning whether an existing solution is over-engineered
- Comparing current approach against industry standards
- Evaluating a /createsolution output before implementing
- Seeking "boring technology" alternatives that just work
- Reducing maintenance burden and operational complexity
How to Invoke
/createreview {topic or existing solution}
Example: /createreview Our current CI/CD pipeline uses 8 tools - can we simplify?