fpf-review

name	fpf-review
description	End-of-session quality gate. Verify the creative and assurance pipeline — not just artifacts. MUST invoke before ending any non-trivial session.

What this skill IS

This is a quality review of both creative work and assurance, not just an artifact checklist. Check:

• Did you design the problem or just react to symptoms?
• Did you explore alternatives or jump to the first solution?
• Did evidence feed back into problem reframing?
• Are there stepping stones worth preserving?

Procedure

1. Restate objective — what was requested, what "done" means

2. Check creative pipeline (problem factory):

   • Was the problem designed proactively or reactively?
   • Does a goldilocks assessment exist? Is the problem feasible-but-hard?
   • Were alternatives to the problem framing considered?
   • If evidence refuted claims: was the problem reframed?

3. Check solution pipeline (solution factory):

   • Was SoTA surveyed (for architectural work)?
   • Was a method family bet made explicitly (STRAT-*)?
   • Were ≥3 genuinely distinct variants generated?
   • Was selection explicit (policy before applying)?
   • Were stepping stones preserved?
   • Were weakest links identified for variants/selected solution (WLNK)?
   • If the solution adds complexity, was MONO justification provided?

4. Check artifacts — tier-appropriate:

   • T2+: ANOM/PROB-* if investigative, EVID-* if claims made
   • T3+: SPORT-* if options evaluated, SEL-* if choice made, DRR-* if irreversible
   • T4: SOTA-* and STRAT-* if architectural
   • All: worklog updated

5. Check feedback loop:

   • Did any evidence show "refuted"? If yes → was PROB-* updated?
   • Did stepping stones get recorded for future work?

6. Check Factory 3 (process improvement):

   • Was there friction in the FPF workflow itself? (gates too strict/loose, templates too heavy, missing skills)
   • Did any hook block you incorrectly? Did any template feel wrong for the task?
   • Process friction is a Factory 3 problem — record it, don't just tolerate it
   • If friction found → write .fpf/anomalies/PROC-${CLAUDE_SESSION_ID}--<slug>.md with:

     # Process Friction Record
     - **ID:** PROC-...  **Created:** YYYY-MM-DD  **Factory:** 1|2|3
     ## Friction observed
     (what happened, which gate/skill/template)
     ## Impact
     (time lost, workaround used, creative quality affected)
     ## Proposed improvement
     (what would fix it — skill change, hook adjustment, template redesign)
     

   • Check .fpf/anomalies/PROC-*.md from previous sessions — are any still unresolved?

7. Run minimum verification — smallest test that reduces risk

8. Report — completed items, evidence links, remaining risks, open threads (including Factory 3 observations)

Output

• Update .fpf/worklog/session-${CLAUDE_SESSION_ID}.md with final summary
• Report to user: what was done, what's verified, what's left

Sentinel cleanup

After review:

1. Write .fpf/.review-done (allows stop hook to pass)
2. Delete .fpf/.session-active