review

name	review
description	Top-level review orchestrator: runs style-check, outline-check, outline-ux-analyzer, code-verify, coherence-check, and pitfalls-check on a file, directory, or PR.
argument-hint	[--non-interactive] [--fix] [--fix-rounds <N>] [--no-log] <path | filename | PR# | PR URL | docs.strapi.io URL | pasted content>
user-invocable	true

/inki:review: full documentation review

Step 0: Parse arguments

If $ARGUMENTS contains --help or -h, print usage and stop, per ../../references/help.md. Do not run the review.

Otherwise, from $ARGUMENTS, detect optional flags anywhere in the list:

• --non-interactive (canonical), aliases --auto-approve, --auto, --yes, -y, --no-questions-asked (all equivalent) → AUTO=true (skip any confirmation gates inside sub-skills; no questions asked)
• --fix → FIX=true (apply every actionable finding the reviewers can make, not only style — see Step 3b)
• --max-review-fix-rounds <N> (canonical), alias --fix-rounds <N> (both equivalent) → set MAX_FIX_ROUNDS=<N>. Caps how many review→fix→re-review iterations Step 3b runs. Defaults to 1 if not given (a single pass, the historical behavior). Only meaningful with --fix; ignored otherwise.
• --no-log, --log-dir <path>, --short-log → logging flags, handled per ../../references/logging.md.

Remove the flags. What remains is the target.

Unless --no-log is passed, write the consolidated report (Step 3) to the run log per ../../references/logging.md, using the resolved SCOPE for the run slug. When /inki:review is invoked by /inki:document, it logs into that run's existing review/ subdirectory (one file per fix-loop round) instead of creating its own run directory.

Step 1: Resolve target to a set of files

Resolve the target by following ../../references/target-resolver.md. It accepts any of: a local path or directory, a bare markdown filename, a GitHub PR (number, #number, or URL), a docs.strapi.io URL, pasted Markdown content, or nothing (changed files on the current branch).

The resolver returns:

• FILES: the list of local files the sub-skills operate on.
• SCOPE: a short label for the report header.
• UPSTREAM_PRS: any strapi/strapi / strapi/cloud code PRs the docs PR's description references (each {repo, number}); empty for non-PR targets or a PR that references none. The docs under review document those code changes, so they are the right source of truth even when unmerged.
• CLEANUP: a command to run when the review finishes (worktree teardown or temp-file removal); may be empty.

If resolution fails (PR has no doc files, filename not found, URL maps to nothing), report why and stop.

Step 2: Dispatch the 6 checks as parallel subagents

For each file in FILES, dispatch the six review checks as parallel subagents using the Agent tool. Issue all calls for a given file in a single batch so they run concurrently. Do NOT run them inline in this skill's context, and do NOT run them one after another. Each subagent reads its target plus its own rubric prompt and returns ONLY a concise findings report; the file contents it reads stay out of this skill's context.

Map each check to its bundled agent (agentType):

Check	Agent (inki:<name>)	What it returns
Style	inki:style-checker	deterministic + AI-judged style issues (pass FIX through)
Outline structure	inki:outline-checker	template/hierarchy issues
Pedagogical UX	inki:ux-analyzer	UX score + flow issues
Code verification	inki:code-verifier	per-block ok/suspicious/broken
Cross-page coherence	inki:coherence-checker	terminology/link/conflict issues
Known pitfalls	inki:pitfalls-checker	cataloged hallucination matches

Pass each agent the absolute TARGET path. For the style check, pass FIX=true when FIX is set (the agent still does not edit files; it flags the auto-fixable subset). The other five agents always return their findings with enough detail (file, location, the precise correction) for the caller to judge in Step 3b whether each one has a single unambiguous fix.

When UPSTREAM_PRS is non-empty, additionally pass it to the code-verifier and the coherence-checker in their prompts (e.g. "UPSTREAM_PRS: strapi/strapi#26737"). The code-verifier verifies against that PR's head as its primary source of truth instead of develop/a local clone; the coherence-checker uses it to tell a real contradiction apart from an expected gap with a not-yet-updated sibling page. This is what prevents the false "this config key/value does not exist" and "this contradicts page X" findings that occur when a docs PR documents an unmerged code change. The other four agents do not need it.

The agents are read-only by construction (their tools allowlists exclude write/commit/push), so neither AUTO nor FIX changes their behavior. They never edit files. All edits happen in Step 3b, applied by this skill. AUTO only governs whether this skill prompts before applying those edits.

Collect the six findings reports per file.

Step 3: Synthesize

Output a combined table:

Review of: <SCOPE>

| Check | Agent | Issues found | Severity |
|-------|-------|--------------|----------|
| Style | inki:style-checker | <N> | low/med/high |
| Outline structure | inki:outline-checker | ... | ... |
| Pedagogical UX | inki:ux-analyzer | ... | ... |
| Code verification | inki:code-verifier | ... | ... |
| Cross-page coherence | inki:coherence-checker | ... | ... |
| Known pitfalls | inki:pitfalls-checker | ... | ... |

Then list issues by file, ordered by severity. For PR-scope reviews, prefix file paths with (PR #<num>) so it's clear the issues are in the PR's version. For a docs.strapi.io URL review, note that the review ran against the published origin/main version, and flag any local uncommitted changes that were excluded (per the resolver). For a pasted-content review, note that coherence and code-verification findings may be incomplete because the file sits outside the docs tree (see the resolver's note).

Step 3b: Apply fixes (only if FIX=true)

The agents are read-only and never edit files. When FIX=true, this skill applies the fixes itself, across all six checks, not only style. The unit of work is one round: apply every actionable fix found, then re-review so a fix that introduced a new issue is caught. This repeats up to MAX_FIX_ROUNDS times (default 1).

What counts as actionable. A finding is applied automatically only when it has a single, unambiguous correction:

• Style: the subset the inki:style-checker agent marked auto-fixable (typos, formatting, em dashes, filler words).
• Code, coherence, pitfalls, outline, UX: findings with one clear correction (a wrong import path, a broken link, a deprecated API call with a known replacement, a missing parallel heading).

Findings that are genuine judgment calls (more than one reasonable fix, or a structural rewrite with trade-offs) are left as suggestions, never force-applied. When in doubt, leave it as a suggestion.

The fix loop:

round = 1
loop:
  apply every actionable fix from this round's findings
  if no fix was applied this round   → break (clean, nothing to do)
  if round >= MAX_FIX_ROUNDS         → break (cap reached)
  re-run Step 2 (the six checks) on the edited file
  re-read the findings
  if no actionable findings remain   → break (clean)
  round = round + 1

With the default MAX_FIX_ROUNDS=1, this is a single pass: apply once, no re-review. Pass --max-review-fix-rounds <N> (alias --fix-rounds <N>) to allow re-review rounds. If the cap is reached with actionable findings still open, do NOT loop further: carry them into the report as remaining findings.

Confirmation (the human-content guard). Unlike /inki:document's internal loop (which edits a draft it just generated), a bare /inki:review often runs on pre-existing, human-authored content. So:

• If AUTO is not set, show the full diff of the round's fixes and confirm before writing. The user can accept all, reject all, or stop the loop. Re-review rounds each get their own confirmation.
• If AUTO=true (--non-interactive), apply without prompting.

Write constraints. Honor the worktree/temp-file constraints in the Rules below: PR, URL, and pasted-content reviews write only to their temporary location, never to the live source.

Record ROUNDS_RUN and the final open-findings count, and reflect them in the Step 3 report.

Step 4: Cleanup

Run the CLEANUP command returned by the resolver (worktree teardown or temp-file removal), even if the review failed. In a Claude-Code-driven execution, invoke it explicitly after Step 3 rather than relying on a bash trap. If CLEANUP is empty, there is nothing to do.

Rules

• Each check stays atomic inside its agent (inki:<name>). This skill only dispatches the checks, synthesizes their reports, and applies the fixes the agents flagged; it never re-implements a check's rubric inline and never decides a finding by itself. Always run a check by dispatching its agent (Step 2), never by performing the check yourself in this context. An orchestrator that quietly does a sub-step's work by hand drops behavior that sub-step owns and is a defect, even if the output looks equivalent.
• If --fix is passed, every actionable finding across all six checks is applied (in Step 3b): a finding with one unambiguous correction. Findings that are judgment calls remain suggestions and are never force-applied.
• The fix loop runs at most MAX_FIX_ROUNDS times (default 1, --max-review-fix-rounds <N> / --fix-rounds <N> to raise). It never loops unbounded; remaining actionable findings are reported, not forced.
• --fix on a PR-scope review applies fixes inside the temporary worktree only (the one created by the resolver). The PR itself is NOT modified by /inki:review. To push the fixes, the user must gh pr checkout <num> themselves and apply the suggestions manually (or use /inki:commit + /inki:push after a manual checkout).
• --fix on a docs.strapi.io URL review applies fixes inside the temporary origin/main worktree only (created by the resolver); that worktree is detached and torn down at cleanup, so nothing is written back. Surface the corrected content in the report, and tell the user to apply it on a real branch.
• --fix on a pasted-content review applies fixes to the temp file only; there is no source file to write back to. Surface the corrected content in the report instead.
• --non-interactive only changes interaction behavior (no per-round confirmation). It does NOT change what gets fixed; that stays controlled by --fix and --max-review-fix-rounds. So --non-interactive --fix means "ask no questions AND apply the actionable findings"; --non-interactive alone reviews silently but changes nothing. Without --non-interactive, --fix still applies fixes but shows the diff and confirms each round first (the human-content guard, see Step 3b).
• Never push, commit, or modify the PR directly. /inki:review edits only the local working file (or the resolver's temporary worktree/temp file). It never stages, commits, or pushes; the user submits the result themselves (e.g. via /inki:submit).

Examples

Review a single file by path:

/inki:review docusaurus/docs/cms/intro.md

Review by bare filename (resolved under docusaurus/docs/):

/inki:review strapi-mcp-server.md

Review changed files on the current branch (no argument):

/inki:review

Review all .md/.mdx files modified by a PR:

/inki:review https://github.com/strapi/documentation/pull/3204
/inki:review 3204
/inki:review #3204

When the PR's description references a code PR (e.g. strapi/strapi#26737), the review auto-detects it and verifies the docs against that code PR's head, not against develop. This is correct even when the code PR is unmerged — the docs are documenting that change:

/inki:review 3302

Review a published page by its docs.strapi.io URL:

/inki:review https://docs.strapi.io/cms/features/strapi-mcp-server

Review pasted Markdown content (paste the page body as the argument):

/inki:review ---
title: My page
---

# My page
...

Review and apply all actionable fixes once, confirming the diff first (single pass):

/inki:review --fix docusaurus/docs/cms/features/strapi-mcp-server.md

Non-interactive review with all actionable fixes applied locally, no prompts (single pass):

/inki:review --non-interactive --fix docusaurus/docs/cms/features/strapi-mcp-server.md

Apply fixes and re-review up to 3 rounds, so a fix that introduces a new issue gets caught:

/inki:review --non-interactive --fix --fix-rounds 3 docusaurus/docs/cms/features/strapi-mcp-server.md