| name | high-signal-review |
| description | Use when reviewing code, a patch, or a design and you want concise findings that focus on correctness, risk, regressions, and missing validation instead of style chatter. |
High-Signal Review
Lead with the issues most likely to hurt users, operators, or future change velocity.
Selective Reading Rule
| File | Purpose | Read When |
|---|
verify.md | final output standard for the review | before delivering findings |
Review Order
- Correctness and broken assumptions
- Security and unsafe trust boundaries
- Behavioral regressions and migration risk
- Missing tests, observability, and rollback gaps
- Maintainability only when it materially affects the above
Output Rules
- Start with findings, ordered by severity
- Explain impact, trigger condition, and why it matters
- Reference the exact file and line when possible
- Keep summaries short and secondary to findings
Good Findings
- a real edge case that now fails
- a missing guard on external input
- a migration path that breaks old data
- a test gap that leaves critical behavior unproven
Preferred Pairings
- Workflow:
.agents/workflows/review.md
- Primary subagent:
reviewer
- Common supporting skills:
code-review, code-review-checklist, release-readiness
- Escalate to
security_auditor or performance_optimizer when the risk axis is specialized
Avoid
- long style lists
- speculative architecture debates with no user impact
- praise-heavy reviews that bury the blocking issue
