Menu
Use when reviewing or requesting code review. Two-stage protocol with fresh-reviewer enforcement.
Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.
Basé sur la classification professionnelle SOC
Use when reviewing architecture decisions. C4 model, dependency inversion, hexagonal boundaries.
Use during discuss-slice and plan-slice to stress-test a spec or plan against domain vocabulary before approval.
Use during research-slice to build disposable experiments that answer technical uncertainty.
Use during project:init to scaffold repo-level agent configuration (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, tracker labels).
Use when debugging. 4-phase investigation, root cause, minimal fix.
Use when implementing features/fixes. Iron law: ¬∃ production code without failing test.
| name | code-review-protocol |
| description | Use when reviewing or requesting code review. Two-stage protocol with fresh-reviewer enforcement. |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| tags | ["process","review"] |
∀ code reviews (spec compliance ∨ code quality).
Stage 1 (spec compliance) MUST pass before Stage 2 (code quality) runs.
| Stage | Role | Checks | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1: Spec | spec reviewer | ∀ criteria implemented? Extra work? Correct interpretation? | PASS ∨ FAIL |
| 2: Quality | code quality reviewer | Correctness, tests (edge cases), patterns, YAGNI, readability | APPROVE ∨ REQUEST_CHANGES |
Before requesting review, verify:
| Level | Meaning | Blocks? |
|---|---|---|
| Critical | Bug, security, data loss | Yes |
| Important | Pattern violation, missing tests, unclear logic | Yes |
| Minor | Style, naming, comment | No |
Core Principle: Only flag issues that cause real problems. Not theoretical concerns, not style preferences.
| Question | If Yes | If No |
|---|---|---|
| Bug ∈ prod? | Critical | Continue |
| Confuses next dev? | Important | Continue |
| ¬noticed ∈ 1000-line diff? | Skip | Continue |
| Blocks merge? | Flag | Skip |
| Just cosmetic? | Skip | Skip |
Anti-Pattern: Nitpicking wastes time and erodes trust. Prefer clear, blocking issues over style commentary.
¬agent reviews code it wrote. Verify reviewer hasn't authored the code under review.
