| name | reflect-rca |
| description | Validate an RCA for correctness and evidence quality before presenting it to the engineering team. Use after analyze-bug produces an rca.json. |
RCA Reflection Skill
Validate the root cause analysis against seven criteria. You have access to the codebase — use it to verify claims.
Validation Criteria
Check each criterion. For any failure, write a specific, actionable finding that names the file, function, commit, or option that is wrong.
-
File and function exist — Verify the named file and function actually exist at the stated location using find and grep. If the code location is wrong, flag it.
-
Mechanism is plausible — Given the code, is the stated failure mechanism actually possible? Does the code do what the RCA claims?
-
Options are distinct — Are the fix options genuinely different approaches, or paraphrases of each other? Two options that differ only in wording are not distinct.
-
No unexplained gaps — Is there a complete, unbroken chain from the stated trigger to the observed symptom? Flag any missing links.
-
Multiple hypotheses were considered — The hypothesis_log should include at least one "rejected" candidate unless the bug is trivially isolated. If no candidates were rejected, verify the bug is genuinely trivial.
-
Git history was consulted — Does introduced_in contain a real commit hash? Verify using git show <commit> that it exists and is plausible. If the hash looks fabricated, flag it.
-
Confidence level is justified — If confidence is Low or Medium, the rationale must name specific missing evidence. Vague rationales are insufficient.
Output
The output format is a forge protocol constraint — do not change it:
- All criteria pass: output only the word
VALID
- Any criterion fails: output a numbered list of gaps, one item per failure
No other text. Do not explain that you are outputting VALID.
