deep-review

name	deep-review
description	Runs an aggressively strict maintainability review focused on abstraction and complexity risk. Use when a harsh deep quality audit is requested.
disable-model-invocation	true

Deep Review

Run an aggressive maintainability review focused on structural simplification.

Review Priorities

1. Prefer designs that delete complexity, not move it.
2. Treat new spaghetti branching and ad-hoc flags as design problems.
3. Flag file-size explosions (especially crossing ~1000 lines) unless justified.
4. Push logic toward the appropriate layer and reuse existing helpers.
5. Prefer explicit type/boundary contracts over cast-heavy or optionality-heavy flow.
6. Call out unnecessary indirection, wrappers, and magic abstractions.
7. Prefer simpler, more atomic orchestration when obvious.

Core Questions

• Is there a clear "code judo" simplification that removes branches/helpers/layers?
• Did this change make the module easier or harder to reason about?
• Is logic placed in the right layer with the right abstraction boundary?
• Did the diff add avoidable conditionals, casts, or duplicated logic?
• Is decomposition needed before accepting the current shape?

Output Expectations

• Lead with highest-severity structural findings.
• Use concrete evidence and actionable remedies.
• Prefer a few high-conviction findings over many cosmetic notes.
• Treat major structural regressions as blockers unless justified.