review-pr

name	review-pr
description	Review Forge pull requests from Codex with Forge-aware heuristics and the shared Forge verdict/merge model.

Forge Repo Adapter: review-pr

Use commands/review-pr.md as the lifecycle source for review phases, GitHub outputs, and merge semantics, but override the project-specific repo assumptions when the PR belongs to RapierCraftStudios/forgedock.

Forge Repo Review Override

For Forge repo PRs:

• Do not require project-specific service paths like services/api, services/worker, or web/.
• Do not depend on commands/review-pr-agents.md as an authoritative domain catalog; it remains reference-only for the shared command system.
• Do not route Forge PRs into review-pr-staging solely because the base/head pair matches staging patterns. Continue in a Forge-aware full review flow in this adapter.

Forge Review Categories

Replace the shared command’s service/domain classification with these categories:

• Router / state machine: commands/work-on.md, commands/orchestrate.md, commands/milestone.md, commands/review-pr.md
• Nested pipeline modules: commands/work-on/**
• Runtime / installer layer: install.sh, install-codex.sh, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, docs/CODEX.md
• Verification scripts: scripts/**
• Docs / changelog alignment: docs/**, CHANGELOG.md

Forge Review Checks

Run the shared review lifecycle, but use Forge-relevant checks:

• bash -n on changed shell scripts
• stale reference scan for outdated .claude/commands, .claude/worktrees, deleted docs, or wrong repo-local paths
• nested skill mapping sanity: Skill("work-on:...") / Skill("review-pr...") references touched by the PR still correspond to installed forge-* skills or repo-local adapters
• installer sanity: if install-codex.sh changed, verify it still generates namespaced skills and does not overwrite unrelated global skills
• changelog coverage for meaningful workflow behavior changes

Review Fan-Out

Use Codex sub-agents only when the diff justifies it. Good fan-out slices for Forge PRs are:

• workflow/state-machine reviewer
• GitHub/CLI integration reviewer
• runtime/installer reviewer
• docs/changelog reviewer

Output Contract

Keep the shared review-pr output behavior:

• evidence-based findings only
• structured findings when reporting issues
• GitHub comment summary
• issue creation for real findings
• merge/approve behavior compatible with work-on/review