meta-codereview-current-diff

name	meta-codereview-current-diff
description	Read the current uncommitted diff, run three independent reviewers (safety + tests-coverage + style) in parallel, then arbitrate a single BLOCK / BLOCK_WITH_OVERRIDE / PASS_WITH_NOTES verdict. Use before commit when you want a multi-perspective second-opinion instead of a single-reviewer agent loop.
kind	meta
meta_priority	65
always	false
final_text_mode	step:arbitrate
triggers	["multi-reviewer diff","codereview my diff","三路 review","审查当前 diff"]
provenance	{"origin":"opensquilla-original","license":"Apache-2.0"}
composition	{"steps":[{"id":"read_diff","kind":"skill_exec","skill":"git-diff","with":"[Truncated]"},{"id":"review_safety","kind":"llm_chat","depends_on":"[Truncated]","with":"[Truncated]"},{"id":"review_tests","kind":"llm_chat","depends_on":"[Truncated]","with":"[Truncated]"},{"id":"review_style","kind":"llm_chat","depends_on":"[Truncated]","with":"[Truncated]"},{"id":"arbitrate","kind":"llm_chat","depends_on":"[Truncated]","with":"[Truncated]"}]}

Codereview of Current Diff (Meta-Skill)

A combinator-style meta-skill that runs three independent reviewers in parallel over the currently-uncommitted diff, then arbitrates a single verdict with a strict priority rule.

This is the same combinator + arbitrate pattern as meta-security-review-bundle, applied to a code-review domain. The three reviewers each carry a tight, project-specific rubric — safety focuses on injection / credentials / G1.6 contract; tests focuses on the "new public surface ⇒ corresponding test" expectation; style flags only a fixed list of antipatterns so it doesn't drift into free-form opinions.

Trigger surface

Fire by saying multi-reviewer diff, codereview my diff, or one of the localized triggers listed in the frontmatter. The diff is read from the working tree (git diff --cached HEAD, falling back to git diff HEAD if nothing is staged).

Fallback

If read_diff returns NO_DIFF, the downstream reviewers should reply with their respective clean verdicts ("CLEAR" / "PASS" / "CLEAN") and arbitrate emits PASS_WITH_NOTES: clean. If a reviewer LLM step fails, the orchestrator's partial outputs are visible in step_outputs; operator should manually re-run the failed reviewer.