fresheyes

name	fresheyes
description	Use when the user asks for "fresh eyes", an independent review, or a second opinion on code, commits, plans, or files.
allowed-tools	Bash
timeout	1800000

Fresh Eyes - Independent Code Review

Invoke an independent model to perform a code review. The reviewer has zero context from your conversation — only the repo and the scope you give it.

Instructions

Step 1: Ensure changes are committed

The reviewer uses git commands and only sees committed code. Before invoking, verify all relevant changes are committed. If not, commit them first (or tell the user uncommitted changes won't be reviewed).

Step 2: Determine the review scope

{{#if args}} Use the provided scope: {{args}} {{else}} Default scope: "Review the staged changes using git diff --cached. If nothing is staged, review the most recent commit using git show HEAD." {{/if}}

The scope should be a clear, specific instruction telling the reviewer what to examine. The reviewer has NO context from your conversation — only the repo and what you tell it.

The user's instructions are paramount. If the user says "do a security review of src/auth/", pass that through faithfully — the scope becomes "Review the files in src/auth/ for security issues." If the user does not scope the review, DO NOT PROVIDE INSTRUCTIONS THAT LIMIT THE SCOPE OF THE REVIEW. Do not use your judgment about what to review, only relay any opinions by the user, if any. Preserve reviewer independence; do not send instructions to the judge.

Good scope examples:

• Review the staged changes using git diff --cached.
• Review commit abc1234 using git show abc1234.
• Review the files in src/auth/.
• Review the files in src/auth/ for security issues. (user explicitly asked for security review)
• Review the plan in docs/plans/2025-01-03-feature.md.
• Review the changes between main and this branch using git diff main...HEAD.
• Review the changes in the worktree at ../feature-worktree using git diff

Bad scope examples:

• check out what we just did (reviewer has no context for "what we just did")
• review src/auth/ again; the buffer overflow has been fixed (don't add your own context — either say nothing, or pass through what the user asked for)

Step 3: Choose a provider

Default to a different model family from yourself — model diversity improves review quality.

• You are Claude → use --gpt
• You are GPT/Codex → use --claude
• You are neither → use --gpt
• User explicitly requests a provider → honor it (--gpt or --claude)

The provider keyword controls which model runs the review. Do NOT include it in the scope text.

If the model you chose throws an error, try another. If that also throws an error, stop and ask the user what to do. DO NOT CONTINUE IF YOU CANNOT FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS.

Step 4: Launch the reviewer

The script path is fresheyes.sh inside this skill's base directory (shown at the top of these instructions).

Run it as a plain foreground command:

bash "<base-directory>/fresheyes.sh" [--gpt|--claude] "<scope from step 2>"

Manual reviews detach automatically, so this returns within a couple of seconds and prints exactly two lines:

FRESHPID=20260729-181530-a3f9c2
NEXT: bash <base-directory>/fresheyes-progress.sh --json 20260729-181530-a3f9c2   (reviews take 5-30 min; poll every 30-60s)

Read the value after FRESHPID= — an OPAQUE run handle (not a process id; do not pass it to ps or kill). Save it; it is your handle for the entire review lifecycle (polling in Step 5, result retrieval in Step 7). The NEXT: line is the exact poll command to run. If no FRESHPID= line is printed, do not proceed to Step 5 — report the command's output to the user.

Do not add setsid, a trailing &, output redirects, or $! — the script backgrounds itself. Run the command exactly as above and read the receipt from its output. Do not add --foreground preemptively: it blocks for the full review (5-30 minutes). Use it only when a poll tells you to (see the state table below) — and when you do, first make sure your harness/exec timeout for that call is longer than the review (request/configure a timeout of at least 30 minutes).

Step 5: Poll every 30-60 seconds

Poll with the exact command from the receipt's NEXT: line:

bash "<base-directory>/fresheyes-progress.sh" --json <handle>

Do not call fresheyes-progress.sh <handle> without --json or --result; bare handle polling is intentionally rejected (usage errors exit 2) because stale legacy progress can look like current output.

Each poll returns one JSON line. The state field and the command's exit code tell you everything:

state	exit	meaning	what you do
launching	0	the review child is starting; no heartbeat yet	poll again in ~15s
running	0	fresh heartbeat; review in progress	keep polling every 30-60s
complete	0	verdict present (verdict: passed/failed)	fetch the review with --result (Step 7)
killed_at_launch	3	the child never wrote its first heartbeat	do what the message says: re-run the SAME command with --foreground, with a harness/exec timeout longer than the review (5-30 min)
died	4	heartbeat went stale and the review process is gone, no verdict	inspect the log at the path in message first (evidence); optionally re-run with --foreground
unknown_handle	5	no tracker for this handle	the handle is wrong, or its trackers were removed (e.g. /tmp cleanup); re-check the receipt, else relaunch

launching and running are healthy states — never treat them as failures, and never abort a poll loop on them. The three failure states carry a message field with the observation, likely cause, and the exact remediation; relay it and follow it.

Poll exit-tolerantly: the failure states return NONZERO exit codes (3/4/5), so a set -e-style loop would abort on the very poll that carries the diagnosis. Capture the output and branch on the JSON state field (or the captured exit code):

output=$(bash <base-directory>/fresheyes-progress.sh --json <handle> || true)

then read state from the captured JSON. Never let a nonzero poll exit kill your loop before you have read the message.

Step 6: Interpret and act

The state table in Step 5 is authoritative. Acting on each of the six states:

• launching or running → healthy; keep polling on the Step 5 cadence.
• complete + verdict=passed → the review passed. Proceed to Step 7.
• complete + verdict=failed → the review completed and found blocking issues. Proceed to Step 7.
• complete with no verdict → the review finished but emitted no PASSED/FAILED marker. This is not a tool failure. Run Step 7 (--result): it returns the review text when the log has content, or a failure diagnostic when it does not. Report exactly what --result returns.
• killed_at_launch → do what the message says: re-run the SAME launch command with --foreground, after making sure your harness/exec timeout for that call is longer than the review (5-30 min; request/configure at least 30 minutes).
• died → relay the message — it leads with the log path as evidence. Optionally re-run with --foreground (same timeout requirement as above).
• unknown_handle → re-check the handle against the receipt's FRESHPID= line; if the handle is right, its trackers were removed (e.g. /tmp cleanup) — relaunch from Step 4.

Do not kill a Fresh Eyes process. If it appears stuck, escalate to the user with evidence instead of stopping it. Evidence should include at least two consecutive --json snapshots showing unchanged line_count, unchanged last_log_mtime_epoch, unchanged provider_events when present, and the relevant pid_state / owner_pid_state values.

Never infer failure from terminal truncation, repeated code excerpts, or a live PID alone.

Step 7: Report results

When state=complete, fetch the final review text:

bash "<base-directory>/fresheyes-progress.sh" --result <handle>

Output the review response exactly as returned. Do not report a running review as failed unless --json reports one of the failure states (killed_at_launch, died, unknown_handle).

Parallel reviews

Multiple fresheyes reviews can run simultaneously. Each invocation mints its own opaque handle and its own tracker files — they never collide. To run two reviews in parallel, save each receipt's handle under a distinct variable and poll them separately.

Common Mistakes

• Forgetting to commit — The reviewer only sees committed code. Uncommitted changes are invisible.
• Biasing the reviewer on your own initiative — If the user just said "review src/auth/ with fresh eyes", don't editorialize the scope into "review src/auth/ for security issues." But if the user asked for a security review, pass that through faithfully.
• Vague scope — "Check our recent work" means nothing to a reviewer with no conversation context. Be specific: which commits, files, or diffs.
• Including provider in scope — "Review using claude the staged changes" passes "using claude" as scope text. Provider goes as a flag (--claude), not in the scope string.
• Not polling — The review takes 5-30 minutes. You must poll every 30-60 seconds until it reaches a terminal state.
• Doing it yourself — either use the process here, or notify the user. Do not try a different approach.
• Killing apparent stuck reviews — do not stop the process. Escalate with two or more --json snapshots that show why it appears stuck.
• Opening the log — Do not read, cat, tail, or grep the log file. Interact only through fresheyes-progress.sh.