[Feature Request] Sub-agent verification: cross-check bot verdicts before accepting

Preflight Checklist

• [x] I have searched existing issues and this hasn't been reported yet
• [x] This is a single report
• [x] I am using the latest version of Claude Code

Summary

Claude accepts or rejects automated review verdicts (Copilot, Codex, DeepSeek, Cursor Bugbot) without independent verification.

Two failure modes observed:

1. Blind acceptance of BLOCK verdict (2026-04-10):
DeepSeek-R1 issued BLOCK on a PR claiming evidence level was overclaimed. Claude immediately downgraded the classification without checking if analogous code in the same repo used the same classification. Cross-check later revealed the existing spend_gate_bridge uses the identical pattern and IS classified at the challenged level. DeepSeek was wrong. Revert required an extra commit.

2. Blind acceptance of 'all clean' (Anthropic #45731):
Sub-agents hallucinated a non-existent CRITICAL bug while missing real fail-open bypasses in the same files.

Proposed Solution

When a bot reviewer issues BLOCK or CRITICAL:

1. Verify the claim exists at the cited file:line via git show
2. Search for analogous patterns in the codebase — is the finding consistent with existing classifications?
3. If the finding contradicts established precedent → respond with evidence, do not comply

When a bot says 'all clean':

1. Pick at least 1 file from the diff
2. Read it independently
3. If anything found → signal to review all files

Why This Matters

Bot reviewers are useful but imperfect. Treating their output as ground truth in either direction (BLOCK or PASS) leads to unnecessary churn or missed bugs. Claude should be a critical consumer of review output, not a relay.

Environment

• Claude Code CLI (latest)
• Model: Claude Opus (Max plan)
• macOS