review-cross-artifact-consistency

name	review-cross-artifact-consistency
description	Review approved planning artifacts for consistency across domain, architecture, contracts, and implementation slices. Use when Codex needs a structured consistency review and, only when explicit gate inputs are provided, a gate decision that finds contradictions, missing traceability, unsupported behaviors, or plan mismatches before implementation. Do not use to create new design artifacts.

Review Cross Artifact Consistency

Goal

Act as a reviewer, not a producer. Decide whether the current artifact set is internally consistent enough for implementation to continue.

Read Shared Contract Reference before reviewing artifacts.

Trigger boundary

• Use to review consistency across existing artifacts.
• Do not use to generate a domain model, architecture, contracts, or slice plan from scratch.

Required input

• Required: domain artifact
• Required: architecture artifact
• Required: contracts artifact
• Optional: implementation plan or slice plan
• Optional gate inputs: acceptance_criteria, blocking_rules, required_invariants, artifact_inventory

Refusal and blocked policy

• Treat missing critical upstream artifacts as a blocking issue.
• Cite evidence from the artifacts under review.
• Reject contradictions even when each artifact looks locally plausible in isolation.
• Avoid redesigning the whole system; describe required fixes instead.
• Return BLOCKED in gate mode when the required gate inputs or critical upstream artifacts are missing.
• If gate inputs are absent, produce a structured review report and do not invent PASS | WARN | FAIL.

Workflow

1. Build a trace from actors and use cases to domain concepts, architecture boundaries, contracts, and slices.
2. Check that the same concepts mean the same thing across artifacts.
3. Identify unsupported contract behavior, orphan slices, missing invariants, and contradictory assumptions.
4. Classify issues as blocking or non-blocking.
5. Produce a gate-style decision only when explicit gate inputs are provided.

Output contract

Use one of these output modes.

Review mode

Write cross-artifact-consistency-review.md or return equivalent Markdown when explicit gate inputs are absent:

# Cross Artifact Consistency Review

## Artifact Metadata
- artifact_id:
- artifact_type: review
- artifact_status: current | superseded
- approval_status: pending_review | approved | changes_required | rejected
- approved_by_gate_profile: none
- gate_report_ref: none | <ref>
- upstream_artifact_refs:

## Reviewed Artifacts
- ...

## Blocking Issues
- issue_id: ISSUE-*
- artifact:
- broken_link_or_contradiction:
- evidence_source:
- evidence_excerpt_or_reference:
- impact:
- required_fix:

## Non-Blocking Issues
- issue_id: ISSUE-*
- artifact:
- issue:
- evidence_source:
- evidence_excerpt_or_reference:
- impact:

## Traceability Gaps
- issue_id: ISSUE-*
- missing_link_from:
- missing_link_to:
- impact:

## Recommendation
- implementation_ready: yes | no
- next_action:

Gate mode

Write cross-artifact-consistency-review.yaml or return equivalent YAML only when explicit gate inputs are present:

artifact_metadata:
  artifact_id: ""
  artifact_type: gate-report
  artifact_status: current | superseded
  approval_status: approved | changes_required | rejected | pending_review
  approved_by_gate_profile: cross-artifact-consistency
  gate_report_ref: self
  upstream_artifact_refs:
    - ""
stage: review-cross-artifact-consistency
gate_profile: cross-artifact-consistency
decision: PASS | WARN | FAIL | BLOCKED
decision_rationale: ""
summary: ""
blocking_issues:
  - issue_id: ""
    artifact: ""
    issue: ""
    evidence_source: ""
    evidence_excerpt_or_reference: ""
    impact: ""
non_blocking_issues:
  - issue_id: ""
    artifact: ""
    issue: ""
    evidence_source: ""
    evidence_excerpt_or_reference: ""
    impact: ""
required_fixes:
  - ""
traceability_gaps:
  - issue_id: ""
    missing_link_from: ""
    missing_link_to: ""
    impact: ""
approved_artifacts:
  - ""
artifact_metadata_updates:
  - artifact_ref: ""
    artifact_status: current | superseded
    approval_status: approved | changes_required | rejected | pending_review
    approved_by_gate_profile: ""
    gate_report_ref: ""
next_step_allowed: true

Quality bar

• Make every blocking issue actionable.
• Use FAIL when a contradiction can produce wrong code or unsupported behavior.
• Use WARN only for non-blocking gaps that stage policy may allow.
• Keep the report terse and evidence-based.
• Never emit gate decisions without explicit gate inputs.
• Keep review and gate artifacts on the same metadata contract as the rest of the system.