| name | security-design-review |
| description | Start a Pi Security design review from a supported Confluence or Notion document URL or from inline Markdown, after explicit user confirmation. No attachments, local files, or binaries. |
Start a Pi design review
Use this skill only when the user explicitly asks to start a Pi Security design review of a design document.
Tools
Both are state-changing and require confirmation:
pi_design_review_url_create - starts a design review for a supported Confluence or Notion document URL (url, http/https only).pi_design_review_markdown_create - starts a design review from inline Markdown design-document content (content, up to 5 MiB).
Accepted inputs
- A Confluence or Notion document URL, or
- Design-document content provided inline as Markdown or plain text in the conversation.
Rejected inputs
Do not accept, convert, or promote any of the following into a design-review call:
- Local file paths or
file:// URIs
- Chat attachments
- PDFs, DOCX files, images, or any binary content
- URLs other than supported Confluence or Notion document URLs
If the user offers one of these, explain that this workflow takes a supported Confluence/Notion URL or inline Markdown, and that other document types are handled in the Pi web app.
Before calling either tool
- Validate the input: a well-formed https Confluence/Notion document URL, or non-empty inline Markdown.
- Show the user exactly what will be submitted: the URL, or the document title plus approximate length for inline Markdown.
- Explain the effect: Pi will start a design review of this document in the authenticated tenant.
- Ask for confirmation and proceed only on an explicit yes in the current turn.
- Call the tool once.
- Report exactly what Pi returned: if the review started, give its status and review ID; otherwise report the returned status as-is. Started or queued means the review is in progress, not finished. Never invent results or completion.
- If the call fails or times out ambiguously, report that and stop. Do not retry automatically, since a retry could start a duplicate review.
