review-delta

name	review-delta
description	Review a delta's implemented code against specs, designs, and decisions
argument-hint	[DELTA-ID]

Review Delta Workflow

Review a delta's implementation for spec compliance, design alignment, and code quality.

Input

Delta ID: $ARGUMENTS (e.g., "DLT-001")

Context

You must load the following skills and read the following files before proceeding.

Skills

• katachi:framework-core - Workflow principles
• katachi:working-on-delta - Per-feature workflow

Delta inventory

• docs/planning/DELTAS.md - Delta definitions

Delta documents

• docs/delta-specs/$ARGUMENTS.md - What to build (requirements)
• docs/delta-designs/$ARGUMENTS.md - Why/how (design rationale)
• docs/delta-plans/$ARGUMENTS.md - Implementation plan with batches

Project decisions

• docs/architecture/README.md - Architecture decisions (ADRs)
• docs/design/README.md - Design patterns (DES)

Feature documentation (for acceptance criteria and architecture)

• Read affected feature specs from delta-spec (use as acceptance criteria source)
• Read affected feature designs from delta-design (use as architecture guidance)

Pre-Check

Verify delta is implemented:

• If delta status is not "✓ Implementation", suggest /katachi:implement-delta $ARGUMENTS first
• Review requires completed implementation

Process

1. Gather Context (Silent)

Read all relevant documentation:

• Delta spec, design, and plan
• Full ADR/DES documents (not just indexes) for all decisions referenced in the delta
• Affected feature specs and designs

Gather the implemented code:

• If the delta is on a feature branch, diff against main:

  git diff origin/main...HEAD
  

• If working on main with uncommitted changes, use working tree diff:

  git diff
  git diff --staged
  

2. Review Loop

Repeat until the code-reviewer returns PASS:

2a. Dispatch Code Reviewer

Task(
    subagent_type="katachi:code-reviewer",
    prompt=f"""
Review this implementation.

## Delta Spec
{spec_content}

## Delta Design
{design_content}

## Implementation Plan
{plan_content}

## Implemented Code
{code_diff_or_files}

## Relevant ADR/DES Documents
{adr_des_content}
"""
)

2b. Fix All Issues

If assessment is NEEDS_WORK, automatically address ALL issues identified:

• Missing acceptance criteria coverage
• Design misalignment
• Pattern violations
• Code quality issues
• Missing decision references
• Missing documentation updates
• Unintended effects / regression risks

Do NOT ask user about fixes — fix everything autonomously.

2c. Verify Fixes

After fixing:

• Re-run all tests
• Re-run linting and type checking
• Fix any new issues introduced by fixes

2d. Re-dispatch

If issues were fixed, loop back to step 2a with the updated code. Continue until the code-reviewer returns PASS.

3. Present Findings to User

Once the code-reviewer returns PASS:

Show the validated implementation:

• Summarize what was reviewed
• List issues found and fixed during the review loop
• Highlight any deviations from spec/design (with rationale from the code)
• Note any emergent patterns detected during review

Invite feedback: "What needs adjustment in this implementation?"

4. Iterate Based on User Feedback

Apply user corrections or changes. Re-run review loop if changes are significant. Repeat until user approves.

5. Finalize

Present summary:

"Implementation review complete for $ARGUMENTS.

[Brief summary of review findings and fixes applied]

Files reviewed:
- [file]: [status and notes]
- ...

Issues found and fixed: [count]
Review iterations: [count]"

Workflow

This is a review-and-fix loop:

• Gather all context silently
• Loop: dispatch code-reviewer → fix all issues → verify → re-dispatch (until PASS)
• Present validated implementation to user
• Iterate based on feedback
• Finalize