review-impl

name	review-impl
description	Read-only verdict on whether an implementation meets its spec: each acceptance criterion classified, unintended changes flagged, test coverage checked. Writes nothing; returns COMPLETE, INCOMPLETE, or NEEDS FIXES. Use to judge finished work; use drift to record that judgement on the spec, wrapup to close the spec out.

Review Implementation Against Spec

Compare what was actually implemented against what the spec or task asked for. Catch deviations, missed requirements, and unintended side effects.

Step 0: Parse arguments

Extract the spec or task file path from the first token. Optionally accept a commit range (e.g., abc123..HEAD) as the second token.

If no commit range is given, infer it: find the commit that added/modified the spec's task breakdown or the commit tagged in the task's status change to "Done".

Step 1: Load the requirements

1. Read the spec or task file in full. Parse YAML frontmatter to extract title, status, depends_on, affects, effort.
2. Extract acceptance criteria, "What to do" steps, "Tests" requirements, and "Boundaries" constraints from the body.
3. Use the affects list from frontmatter as the expected set of files that should be modified by this implementation.
4. If reviewing a full spec (non-leaf), read all child spec files in the subdirectory and aggregate requirements recursively.

Step 2: Load the implementation

1. Get the diff for the commit range: git diff <range> --stat for file list, then git diff <range> for full changes.
2. Get the commit messages: git log <range> --oneline for the narrative.
3. Group changes by file to understand what was touched.

Step 3: Check acceptance criteria

For each acceptance criterion or "What to do" step:

• Search the diff for evidence that it was implemented.
• Classify as: Implemented, Partially implemented, Not implemented, or Cannot determine.
• For "Partially implemented", explain what's missing.

Report: checklist of criteria with status.

Step 4: Check for unintended changes

Compare files touched in the diff against the affects list from frontmatter and files listed in the spec body's "What to do" section:

• Flag files modified that aren't in affects or mentioned in "What to do".
• For each unexpected file, read the diff hunk and assess whether the change is:
  • Necessary (e.g., import added by a refactor)
  • Cleanup (formatting, dead code removal)
  • Scope creep (new behavior not in the spec)
  • Regression risk (modifying unrelated logic)

Report: list of unexpected changes with assessment.

Step 5: Check test coverage

For each "Tests" requirement in the spec/task:

• Search for a matching test function in the diff or codebase.
• Verify the test actually tests what the requirement asks for (not just that a test with a similar name exists).
• Flag requirements with no corresponding test.
• Discover and run the affected repository's documented test command.

Report: test coverage against requirements.

Step 6: Check boundary compliance

For each "Boundaries" constraint ("do NOT change X"):

• Search the diff for changes to the forbidden area.
• Flag violations with the specific diff hunk.

Report: boundary violations, or "Boundaries: respected".

Step 7: Check documentation

If the spec or task mentions documentation updates:

• Verify the relevant doc files were modified in the diff.
• Check that new API routes, env vars, or CLI flags appear in the docs.
• Cross-reference repository instructions and public documentation for consistency.

Report: documentation gaps, or "Docs: OK".

Step 8: Summary

Present a structured report:

## Implementation Review: <spec/task name>

Commits: N commits, M files changed, +A/-D lines
Commit range: <range>

### Acceptance Criteria
- [x] <criterion> — implemented in <file>
- [ ] <criterion> — NOT implemented
- [~] <criterion> — partial: <what's missing>

### Unintended Changes
- <file>: <assessment>

### Test Coverage
- [x] <requirement> — covered by TestFoo
- [ ] <requirement> — NO TEST

### Boundary Compliance
- OK / <violations>

### Documentation
- OK / <gaps>

### Verdict: COMPLETE / INCOMPLETE / NEEDS FIXES

Do NOT modify any files. This skill is read-only. If issues are found, list specific remediation steps for the user to act on.