| name | spec-review |
| description | Independent second-developer review of an open PR against its ticket's spec — standalone entrypoint, no shared session with whoever implemented it. Input is the ticket (holds the approved spec plus any updates landed during implementation). Output is the full gate-3-style review for the developer's own approval gate before manual QA and merge. Use when a different developer needs to review a finished branch/PR before it merges. |
Spec review (independent, PR-facing)
Concise, compact, facts only.
.claude/AGENTS.workflow.md's ### Gate 3 defines what a review checks (spec fidelity, standards, TDD honesty) and how (spec-reviewer agent, never the implementer). This skill supplies gate 3's inputs for a reviewer outside the implementing session; it restates no criteria. Conflict → .claude/AGENTS.workflow.md wins.
Gather inputs — no shared session, no artifacts dir
- Ticket —
sh .claude/scripts/extract-section.sh '### Gate 1b — tracking issue. Stop for approval.' .claude/AGENTS.workflow.md names the tracker and how to read it. Ticket is self-contained: full current normative text, including updates landed via "Reconcile the spec". This is the approved spec — artifacts/<slug>/spec-diff.md may not exist on this machine or may be gone.
- Branch/PR — from the ticket's linked PR, or ask the user for PR number/branch.
- Base ref — PR's target branch (usually
main).
Run the review
Spawn spec-reviewer (.claude/agents/spec-reviewer.md) with: spec text from the ticket, git diff <base>...<head> scoped to the whole branch (gate 3, not a wave), every stage in scope. It reads its own rules (.claude/AGENTS.core.md); give it nothing more, never the issue/PR number.
Give it a scratch artifacts/<slug>/ for review.md; it answers with a status line only (### Agent hand-off). Reviewing yourself instead of spawning is fine — same axes, same rigor. Requirement is an independent read, not necessarily a subagent.
Output
review.md: axis-grouped, severity-tagged, no praise. Point the developer at the file; findings needing a user decision are flagged, not resolved.
Stop condition
Report and stop. Approving is the developer's own gate before manual QA and merge — no PR edits, no merge, no board.
