workbench-code-review

name	workbench-code-review
description	Findings-first review discipline for code, diffs, task plans, live workflow changes, and implementation evidence.

Workbench Code Review

Use this skill for reviewing code, diffs, task plans, live workflow changes, and implementation evidence before merge or closure.

Review Stance

• Findings first. Do not lead with praise or a broad summary.
• Order findings by severity and user impact.
• Tie every finding to a file, command, issue/comment ID, run ID, or observable behavior.
• Prefer concrete repro or blast-radius evidence over style opinions.
• If no issues are found, say that clearly and name remaining test gaps.

Severity

• P0: security, data loss, irreversible action, or broken primary workflow.
• P1: likely user-facing regression or unsafe automation.
• P2: correctness gap, missing edge case, or weak verification.
• P3: maintainability, clarity, or low-risk cleanup.

Checklist

• Does the implementation match the promised objective?
• Are owner boundaries preserved?
• Are live mutations backed up and reversible?
• Are commands, IDs, and paths reproducible?
• Are tests or real-path checks sufficient for the blast radius?
• Did the change avoid unrelated refactors and hidden policy changes?

Output Contract

For findings:

• SEVERITY
• LOCATION
• ISSUE
• WHY IT MATTERS
• REQUIRED FIX

For a clean review:

• VERDICT: PASS
• EVIDENCE CHECKED
• TEST GAPS
• RESIDUAL RISK