| name | review |
| description | Review a requested diff or branch in independent correctness, security, maintainability, test, documentation, and ship-readiness passes. |
Multi-Pass Review
Review the requested diff, branch, pull request, wiki, or working tree. Default an
ambiguous scope to the current diff.
Workflow
- Inspect exact scope and repository instructions.
- Run isolated standards and specification passes. Independent read-only lenses for
correctness, security, maintainability, and tests/docs may run concurrently.
- Give each reviewer the same immutable scope and require file/line evidence.
- Deduplicate by root cause, then run an explicit verifier node over the proposed
PASS/HOLD decision.
- Return the report and a concise typed evidence receipt in the conversation.
- Run only checks or tests known not to write project files. If a command may write
caches, snapshots, lockfiles, generated artifacts, or other project state, report
the exact command as a recommended verification step instead of running it.
Budget: at most six specialist calls, four concurrent read-only lenses, and one retry
for missing evidence.
Review Contract
- Critical: security/data loss/broken build/wrong behavior; blocks merge.
- Important: should fix in this PR before merge.
- Minor: safe follow-up or style suggestion.
- Suggestions are not blockers unless tied to concrete risk.
- Any secret-shaped added line is fail-closed until proven safe.
- Verify docs drift when behavior, commands, manifests, or public workflow changes.
Evidence Receipt
Return spk.evidence/v1 with reviewed scope, ranked findings, file/line evidence,
verification commands/results, PASS/HOLD decision, risks, and next action.
Guardrails
- Review only; do not create or modify project files, including reports, caches,
snapshots, lockfiles, or generated artifacts. Do not fix, stage, commit, push,
or deploy.
- Critical or Important evidence means HOLD until fixed or explicitly accepted.
- Do not report style preferences as blockers without a concrete risk.
