review

name	review
description	Run Hard Rules compliance review on changed code. Use when code has been written and needs review before commit, or when the user asks for a code review or self-review.
argument-hint	["task-name"]
allowed-tools	Read, Grep, Glob

I have written code for: $ARGUMENTS

Ref: .dev-context/claude-context.md for build constraints, architecture, coding conventions, and the Hard Rules.

---

SELF-REVIEW (before commit)

Run through each of the Hard Rules. For each rule, provide one of:

• [N/A] - Not applicable to this change
• [OK] - Compliant because: [brief reason]
• [FIX] - Violation found at [file:line]: [description]

COMPLIANCE TABLE

#	Rule	Status	Notes
0	No std::shared_ptr in Seastar code
1	No std::mutex in metrics/query methods
2	No co_await inside loops (use parallel_for_each)
3	Null-guard all C string returns
4	Every container has MAX_SIZE
5	Timer callbacks have gate guards
6	Metrics deregistered first in stop()
7	No validation in persistence layer
8	Per-shard state in ShardLocalState struct
9	Every catch block logs at warn+
10	String-to-number uses std::from_chars
11	Global state uses call_once/atomic
12	Use Seastar file I/O (no std::ifstream)
13	Thread-local raw new has destroy function
14	Force local allocation for cross-shard data
15	Reallocate locally before FFI across boundaries
16	Wrap lambda coroutines with seastar::coroutine::lambda()
17	Insert preemption points in loops (>100 iterations)
18	Every future must be awaited or explicitly handled
19	Use with_semaphore()/get_units(), never raw wait()/signal()
20	Always use auto& in do_with lambdas; prefer coroutines
21	Coroutines take parameters by value, not reference
22	Wrap throws in futurize_invoke(); prefer coroutines
23	Clone temporary_buffer for long-lived data, don't share()

ADDITIONAL CHECKS

Async Flow Integrity

• All futures are awaited or explicitly discarded
• No hidden blocking calls (file I/O, DNS, sleep)
• Cross-shard calls use smp::submit_to
• Any seastar::async( site carries a // rule12-allow: <reason> marker (CI enforces via scripts/lint-seastar-async.sh)

Error Handling

• All error paths are handled (no silent failures)
• Exceptions don't escape coroutines unexpectedly
• Resource cleanup happens on all paths (RAII)

Memory Safety

• No dangling references in lambdas
• Captured this pointers are protected by gates
• No use-after-move

---

SKEPTICAL PASS (before sign-off)

The Hard Rules table catches known anti-patterns; this pass catches what the table doesn't. Re-read the diff as a hostile reviewer who assumes it is wrong:

• Weakest change: name the single change (file:line) most likely to break, and the realistic way it fails — under load, across shards, on restart, or on malformed input. Justify why it holds, or fix it.
• Not verified statically: state what you could not confirm by reading or grep. Anything needing a real build or run is a Deferred Gate — give the developer the exact command and the pass/fail output to look for.

---

OUTPUT FORMAT

Compliance Summary

Compliant: #0, #1, #3, #7, #8, #10, #11
Not Applicable: #5, #6
Violations: #2, #4, #9

Violations Requiring Fix

For each [FIX]:

Rule #2 - src/services/router.cc:156
  Issue: Sequential co_await in for loop over backends
  Fix: Replace with seastar::parallel_for_each

Ready to Commit?

• [YES] - All rules pass, ready for commit
• [NO] - Fixes required (list above)

If violations found, fix and re-run this review. Only commit when all checks pass and the skeptical pass is clean. Then run /doc for tests and documentation.