groove-work-review

name	groove-work-review
description	Evaluate output, identify lessons, decide accept/rework. Use after implementation.
license	MIT
allowed-tools	Read Write Edit Glob Grep Bash(git:*) AskUserQuestion
metadata	{"author":"andreadellacorte"}

groove-work-review

Outcome

The artifact is reviewed for correctness, quality, and fit to plan. Lessons are identified for the compound stage. A clear accept/rework decision is made with rationale. Review notes are captured in the task body.

Acceptance Criteria

• Artifact is evaluated against the plan and acceptance criteria
• Specific gaps or issues are identified (not vague "needs improvement")
• Accept or rework decision is stated with rationale
• Lessons are noted for /groove-work-compound
• Review notes appended to stage task body
• Stage task created in backend: YYYY-MM-DD, Review

Steps

1. Branch-diff analysis: determine the base branch (default: main; override with base: arg if provided). Run:

   • git log --oneline <base>...HEAD — list commits on this branch
   • git diff <base>...HEAD --stat — summarise changed files
   • git diff <base>...HEAD — full diff (use as review input) Use this diff as the primary artifact to evaluate. If no commits beyond base exist, review working-tree changes instead.

2. Evaluate against plan and acceptance criteria — read the plan from the task body or spec file if available.

3. Categorise findings (use these exact labels):

   • Fix Now: trivial issues — fix immediately before accepting
   • Needs Spec: important gaps requiring planning — create a spec
   • Create Issues: large effort or nice-to-have — track as tasks

4. State accept or rework decision with rationale.

5. Note lessons for /groove-work-compound.

6. Append review notes to the task body.

7. Create stage task via /groove-utilities-task-create if tasks.backend != none (title YYYY-MM-DD, Review).

Constraints

• Read tasks.backend from .groove/index.md to determine backend
• Be thorough — 80% of compound loop value is here and in plan
• If rework: note specific gaps and link back to which plan step was missed or unclear
• If accept: still note what worked well and what could be improved next time
• Do not skip review even for small changes — capture something