| name | git-review |
| description | Goal-directed review of git history for change coherence.
Trigger when:
- Analyzing project history, reviewing diffs, or checking commit messages for alignment.
- Prompt contains: /git-review, git history, commit log, change coherence.
|
Git Review Workflow
A structured approach to reviewing change history with an explicit purpose. Never browse history aimlessly — always state what you're looking for.
Adversarial path anchor. This lens is invoked on the Verification Dual's adversarial path (rules.md §2 Invariant 1): when no deterministic evaluator can close a change-coherence condition, context-free agents using this protocol supply the decorrelated review. See skills/refine/SKILL.md AUDIT §"Sibling Skills Consultation" for the wiring point.
Entry: State Your Purpose
Before reviewing history, declare what you're investigating — state your purpose and scope (commits, timeframe, file path, or keyword).
Examples:
- "Trace how the auth module evolved before modifying it"
- "Find where the API contract changed and whether it was justified"
- "Locate commits related to the parsing bug we're debugging"
Modes
SUMMARY — Get the lay of the land
git log --oneline -n 20
git log --oneline --since="1 week ago"
git shortlog -sn --since="1 month ago"
SEARCH — Find commits relevant to your purpose
git log --grep="keyword" --oneline
git log --all --oneline -- "path/to/file"
git log -S "function_name" --oneline
EXPAND — Examine specific commits
git show <hash>
git diff <hash>^..<hash>
git show <hash> --stat
Review Procedure
- STATE PURPOSE — What are you trying to trace or verify?
- SUMMARY — Scan relevant history for context
- SEARCH — Narrow to commits relevant to your purpose
- EXPAND — Examine suspicious or unclear commits
- ASSESS — Apply the coherence checklist
Coherence Checklist
When examining a commit, assess:
Output Format
GIT REVIEW
PURPOSE: [stated purpose]
SCOPE: [what was searched]
COMMITS EXAMINED: N
RELEVANT:
- <hash>: <summary>
Finding: [how it relates to purpose]
CONCERNS:
- <hash>: <summary>
Issue: [problem identified]
CONCLUSION: [what was learned, relative to purpose]
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. [Actionable item]
Integration with the Active Workflow
The active closed-loop execution workflow (/core, /refine) requires ledger updates and JUSTIFICATION blocks at each COMMIT boundary. Well-formed commits should:
- Have atomic scope matching the commit message
- Document any scope drift, breaking changes, or technical debt
- Be independently reviewable
Red flags: Commits with "and" in the message, unexplained scope changes, or missing context.
Recovery: If inconsistencies are found, use /core to plan remediation.