Do others use two entirely different LLVMs to generate and audit code? I'm looking for feedback on my processes.

Code Generation

I try to maintain a consistent behavior and my current procedure is as follows:

1. Instruct the generator not to generate any code until it has read all instructions.
2. Instruct the generator to perform all steps in the order instructed
3. Instruct the generator to restate my instructions and ask clarifying questions.
4. Respond to all questions as thoroughly as I can in as clear way as I can.

After code generation I immediately take that code and feed it to a second LLVM which I consider to have weaker code generation capability but a better auditing capability.

Code Auditing and Refactoring

Auditing and Refactoring generally takes 3-4 cycles:

1. Ask the auditor to peform a critical analysis of the generated module

2. Provide that response to the generate asking it to assess the critque

3. Once it replies, I ask it to refactor based on valid criticism.

4. Perform this process again until the the auditor criticism is minimal and the generator has performed what it considers a final production ready module

5. Ensure the auditor agrees with the assessment.

What do others do which differs from this? Am I approaching the process based on any false assumptions? Are there any significant enhancements I should make?