review-synthesis

What this skill does

# review-synthesis

Aggregate multi-reviewer feedback into consolidated, actionable recommendations.

## Triggers


Alternate expressions and non-obvious activations (primary phrases are matched automatically from the skill description):

- "merge reviews" → multi-reviewer feedback synthesis
- "synthesize feedback" → review consolidation

## Purpose

This skill aggregates feedback from multiple reviewers into cohesive, prioritized recommendations by:
- Collecting feedback from parallel review processes
- Identifying consensus and conflicts
- Prioritizing by impact and frequency
- Resolving contradictions with rationale
- Generating actionable synthesis reports

## Behavior

When triggered, this skill:

1. **Collects review inputs**:
   - Gather all reviewer feedback files
   - Parse structured and unstructured comments
   - Identify reviewer roles and expertise areas

2. **Categorizes feedback**:
   - Group by feedback type (content, design, technical, legal)
   - Tag by severity (blocking, major, minor, suggestion)
   - Map to asset sections/elements

3. **Identifies patterns**:
   - Find consensus (multiple reviewers agree)
   - Detect conflicts (reviewers disagree)
   - Note unique insights (single reviewer)

4. **Resolves conflicts**:
   - Apply priority rules
   - Document both positions
   - Provide resolution rationale
   - Flag for escalation if needed

5. **Prioritizes actions**:
   - Rank by business impact
   - Consider implementation effort
   - Group quick wins vs major changes

6. **Generates synthesis**:
   - Executive summary
   - Detailed action items
   - Conflict resolution notes
   - Approval recommendations

## Review Categories

### Content Reviews

```yaml
content_feedback:
  sources:
    - content-writer
    - editor
    - copywriter
    - content-strategist

  aspects:
    - messaging_clarity
    - value_proposition
    - tone_voice
    - cta_effectiveness
    - audience_alignment

  weight: high
  priority_in_conflict: medium
```

### Brand Reviews

```yaml
brand_feedback:
  sources:
    - brand-guardian
    - creative-director
    - art-director

  aspects:
    - visual_identity
    - verbal_identity
    - brand_consistency
    - guideline_compliance

  weight: high
  priority_in_conflict: high
```

### Technical Reviews

```yaml
technical_feedback:
  sources:
    - quality-controller
    - production-coordinator
    - technical-marketing-writer

  aspects:
    - specifications
    - file_formats
    - rendering_quality
    - platform_compatibility

  weight: medium
  priority_in_conflict: high_for_blocking
```

### Legal Reviews

```yaml
legal_feedback:
  sources:
    - legal-reviewer
    - legal-liaison

  aspects:
    - claims_substantiation
    - disclosures
    - trademark_usage
    - regulatory_compliance

  weight: critical
  priority_in_conflict: highest
```

### Strategic Reviews

```yaml
strategic_feedback:
  sources:
    - campaign-strategist
    - marketing-analyst
    - positioning-specialist

  aspects:
    - campaign_alignment
    - competitive_positioning
    - market_fit
    - kpi_potential

  weight: medium
  priority_in_conflict: medium
```

## Conflict Resolution Rules

### Priority Hierarchy

```yaml
conflict_resolution:
  priority_order:
    1: legal_compliance  # Always wins
    2: brand_guidelines  # Strong preference
    3: technical_requirements  # If blocking
    4: strategic_alignment  # Business logic
    5: content_preference  # Style choices
    6: design_preference  # Aesthetic choices

  escalation_triggers:
    - legal_vs_brand
    - strategy_vs_brand
    - multiple_blockers
    - no_clear_winner

  resolution_methods:
    consensus: Majority agreement (3+ reviewers)
    expertise: Defer to domain expert
    priority: Apply priority hierarchy
    escalate: Flag for stakeholder decision
```

### Conflict Types

```yaml
conflict_types:
  direct_contradiction:
    description: Reviewer A says X, Reviewer B says not-X
    resolution: Apply priority hierarchy
    documentation: Required

  style_preference:
    description: Different aesthetic preferences
    resolution: Defer to brand/creative director
    documentation: Optional

  scope_disagreement:
    description: Disagree on what needs changing
    resolution: Defer to strategic alignment
    documentation: Required

  priority_disagreement:
    description: Agree on issue, disagree on severity
    resolution: Take higher severity
    documentation: Optional
```

## Synthesis Report Format

```markdown
# Review Synthesis Report

**Asset**: Q1 Product Launch Campaign - Landing Page
**Reviews Collected**: 6
**Date**: 2025-12-08
**Synthesizer**: review-synthesis skill

## Executive Summary

| Metric | Count |
|--------|-------|
| Total Comments | 47 |
| Consensus Items | 28 |
| Conflicts Resolved | 8 |
| Escalations Needed | 2 |
| Blocking Issues | 3 |
| Major Issues | 12 |
| Minor Issues | 25 |
| Suggestions | 7 |

**Overall Assessment**: Asset requires revisions before approval.

## Reviewer Participation

| Reviewer | Role | Comments | Focus Areas |
|----------|------|----------|-------------|
| Sarah Chen | Brand Guardian | 12 | Visual identity, logo usage |
| Marcus Johnson | Editor | 8 | Copy clarity, grammar |
| Elena Rodriguez | Legal Reviewer | 5 | Claims, disclosures |
| David Kim | Campaign Strategist | 10 | Messaging, positioning |
| Amy Liu | Quality Controller | 7 | Technical specs |
| James Wilson | Creative Director | 5 | Overall creative |

## Consensus Items (High Confidence)

### 1. Hero Headline Needs Strengthening
- **Reviewers**: Sarah, Marcus, David (3/6 = consensus)
- **Current**: "Introducing Our New Product"
- **Issue**: Generic, doesn't communicate value
- **Recommendation**: "Cut Your Workflow Time in Half"
- **Priority**: High
- **Effort**: Low (copy change only)

### 2. CTA Button Color
- **Reviewers**: Sarah, Amy, James (3/6 = consensus)
- **Current**: Light gray (#CCCCCC)
- **Issue**: Low contrast, doesn't stand out
- **Recommendation**: Brand green (#00AA55)
- **Priority**: High
- **Effort**: Low

### 3. Missing Privacy Disclosure
- **Reviewers**: Elena (legal = authoritative)
- **Issue**: Form collects email without privacy notice
- **Requirement**: Add privacy policy link
- **Priority**: Blocking
- **Effort**: Low

## Conflicts Resolved

### Conflict 1: Product Image Style
- **Position A** (Sarah, Brand Guardian): Use lifestyle photography
- **Position B** (James, Creative Director): Use product-only shots
- **Resolution**: Lifestyle photography
- **Rationale**: Brand guidelines specify lifestyle imagery for hero sections
- **Priority Rule Applied**: Brand guidelines (priority 2)

### Conflict 2: Headline Tone
- **Position A** (Marcus, Editor): Professional, formal tone
- **Position B** (David, Strategist): Casual, conversational tone
- **Resolution**: Professional with conversational elements
- **Rationale**: Hybrid approach matches brand voice profile (Friendly Professional)
- **Priority Rule Applied**: Brand alignment via voice profile

### Conflict 3: Feature List Length
- **Position A** (David, Strategist): Show all 10 features
- **Position B** (Sarah, Brand Guardian): Limit to top 5
- **Resolution**: Top 5 features with "See all features" link
- **Rationale**: Balances completeness with visual clarity
- **Priority Rule Applied**: Consensus via compromise

## Escalations Required

### Escalation 1: Pricing Display
- **Issue**: Whether to show pricing on landing page
- **Position A** (David): Show pricing for transparency
- **Position B** (Marcus): Hide pricing, focus on value
- **Why Escalated**: Strategic decision beyond reviewer authority
- **Decision Needed From**: Marketing Director
- **Deadline**: Before final approval

### Escalation 2: Competitor Comparison
- **Issue**: Include comparison chart with competitors?
- **Position A** (David): Yes, differentiates product
- **Position B** (Elena): Risk of legal issues without substantiation
- **Why Escalated**: Legal/strategy conflict
- **Decision N