mcpField
R
review-change

review-change

github.com/gtrabancoTesting & quality2297 installsUpdated today
Repository

About review-change

A review skill for applying relevant quality checks to a change and producing one classified report without editing code. It is designed for pre-merge reviews and keeps review passes isolated from implementation context.

Key features

  1. 01Select applicable review checks
  2. 02Run isolated review passes
  3. 03Synthesize and classify findings
  4. 04Record review outcomes
  5. 05Require a receipt for passing PR reviews

Use cases

  1. 01Reviewing a change before merge
  2. 02Checking security and correctness in scope
  3. 03Producing a consolidated findings report

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow --skill review-change

After installing, type/review-changein Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Bundled files

References and scripts installed along with SKILL.md.

references/
ADVERSARIAL_RECOMMENDATION.md
ADVERSARIAL_SETUP.md
ADVERSARIAL_SYNTHESIS.md
OUTPUT_AND_GUARDRAILS.md
PERSIST_AND_DECIDE.md
PORTABILITY.md
REVIEW_PROCESS.md

Details

From the project README

Review Change

Quality gate: run every applicable review and skip the rest, then synthesize and classify one report. Findings only; never edit or refactor.

Turn contract

Load and verify the canonical Turn contract (11 boxes) before ending every turn. Skill-specific additions (receipt closeout, isolation rule, applicability) live here and in REVIEW_PROCESS.md. Missing reference → STOP.

For a final PR review, the turn is incomplete until this additional box passes:

✓ Decision: REVIEW-PASS + PR exists →
  `bun scripts/review-receipt.mjs emit --pr <N> --head "$(git rev-parse HEAD)" …`
  RUN and exited 0 — the script posts the SHA-bound comment, re-reads the PR
  comments, and exits non-zero unless the newest exact-HEAD
  `review-change:pass` marker is confirmed, so its exit code IS this box

When the receipt emitter runs, it also records the affecting-path scope manifest (fix/286) so a foreign-only commit after the review (a session-log or toolstate commit on a shared checkout) does not void the receipt at the merge gate — pass --scope-base main (the unit's base ref) and the runtime derives the manifest itself; never hand-assemble a digest. A receipt without a scope manifest stays head-bound (legacy semantics).

The receipt closeout is a precondition of the report, not a follow-up: do not print the fixed report block on a non-zero exit. A clean report without a current receipt must not recommend /audit-pr.

For REVIEW-FAIL or NEEDS-DECISION, list every open finding ID in the closing recommendation, joined with +; the review must never hand off only the first finding.

Review-end turn boundary

On REVIEW-FAIL or NEEDS-DECISION, this skill ends at the report: it never invokes /fold-findings, /execute-phase, /unit-lane or /triage-issue — those are separate user-initiated invocations, run in a fresh turn (a programmatic outer driver may compose the same sequence in-turn, per REVIEW_PROCESS.md). The review's only mutations are the ledger commit (persist step 11) and, on REVIEW-PASS with a PR, the receipt comment (persist step 12); it never folds a finding, executes a phase, or edits code. A REVIEW-FAIL/NEEDS-DECISION turn closes when the report block is printed (report step 13).

Consume the internal verification contract; the reviewer checks the same frozen acceptance artifact (legacy (pre-feature 61) ACCEPTANCE.md or post-feature-61 unit doc ## Acceptance criteria) as the executor before mapping candidate evidence.

When to use

  • Mandatory before every merge. Review in a context that did not implement the change; if it did, stop and hand off to a fresh one. execute-phase may also recommend optional checkpoints at layer boundary, accumulation or sensitivity (#77).
  • Use when you need applicable reviews without irrelevant passes.

Scope

Default target is the current change (branch diff vs the default branch); accept a path/glob to widen or narrow. State the scope at the top of the report.

Review charter — dismantle the claim

The workflow's job is to demonstrate that what works, works — and works well: programmatically, engineering-wise, decision-wise, and against user expectation. This review exists to try to dismantle that claim; if it survives the attempt, that survival is the review outcome. So:

  • In-scope defects are this review's job — never “out of scope”. A bug, a security issue, or a guard skip inside the current feature's scope is a review-change finding: a feature is not complete while it has one. The reward is not delivery, it is meeting the acceptance criteria, adequate engineering without over-engineering, meeting other features' requirements (a page that needs auth verifies the session and the permission; a change to another table that a requirement depends on stays in scope even if it “looks” out of scope), and above all the user's expectation.
  • Ask, don't infer — the whole expectation surface. Where the plan, the diff or the requirement leaves the user's expectation unclear, surface it as a question in non-technical terms (a technical user asks for an app; a non-technical user asks for “an app to measure my heart rate”) — never as an assumed intent. This extends ask-don't-infer from acceptance criteria to every expectation the change is judged against.
  • Repo-wide hunting is not this review. Open-ended bug hunting, security research and broken-version investigation across the repository belong to product-audit, where the sweep is scoped and budgeted; this review stays on the change at hand.

Step 0 — Discover the project & the change (always first)

Per Workflow conventions + documentation map, decide axes from:

  1. Project nature: UI (docs/frontend/), web/mobile/CLI/library/backend, and optional recorded platform skills (extras only).
  2. Footprint: what the diff touches (UI, API, infra, domain). An axis applies only when both project and footprint support it.
  3. Prior findings (optional retrieval aid, never authoritative): when the index entry point exists, agentic-workflow doc --query "<change topic>" --json-only may surface earlier findings, decisions and session-log entries on the same surface before the passes run. A missing index, an absent entry point, or an empty answer changes nothing — grep stays the exhaustive fallback, and the index is never a decision authority.

Applicability matrix (default; the project's docs refine it)

Every axis maps to a skill of the workflow's own internal review pack (skills/review-* — installed with the workflow, so none can be missing):

Axis — internal pack skillWebMobileConsole/CLILib/SDKBackend/Infra
review-code (correctness, simplification, dead code, duplication, arch)✓✓✓✓✓
review-security✓✓✓✓✓
review-verify (run it, confirm real behavior, tests)✓✓✓✓✓
review-design (UI/UX)✓✓TUI only✗✗
review-a11y✓✓rare✗✗
review-brand (voice/copy)✓✓output text✗✗
review-perf✓✓✓✓✓
review-seo✓✗✗✗✗
API ergonomics / usage docs (inline pass)if APIif APIflags/help✓✓✓

review-implementation (the single classifier over the synthesized table — process step 8) and review-debt (the debt transform over the classified table — process step 9) are not axis finders: they run once per review, not per axis.

Isolation rule (default — every pass, not only adversarial)

Each applicable pass, the verification pass (step 6), the classifier (step 8), and debt transform (step 9) runs isolated/context-clean and returns only its fixed findings table plus PASS | FAIL—never diff or prose. Spawn one fresh subagent/headless run per pass; without those, use a fresh conversation. Pass only scope, its checklist, and Step 0 docs; cap full non-diff reads at 10 (targeted ≤50-line reads/greps excluded). The orchestrator retains tables, not sources, and fuses them in step 7. Inline fallback is sequential table reduction. A pass runs at its own tier or stronger, never weaker.

Progressive loading — choose one review route

After applicability and isolation are established:

The reference allowlist is exactly the seven linked paths below. Never invent or read another references/ path.

Invocation routeLOAD in this orderSKIP
Default reviewreview process → adversarial recommendation → persist and decide → output and guardrailssynthesis, portability, adversarial setup
--adversarial Nreview process → adversarial setup before reviewers → adversarial synthesis before fusion → persist/decide → output/guardrailsportability
--synthesizereview process → adversarial synthesis plus the supplied reviewer tables → persist/decide → output/guardrailsadversarial setup, portability
legacy --mergeprint the fixed migration refusal below and stop — zero git/forge mutationeverything

Legacy --merge is removed — not an alias. Calling /review-change --merge prints this fixed migration refusal and stops before any git or forge mutation command runs:

migration: --merge is removed. Table fusion is --synthesize: pass the fixed
reviewer tables the same way and the synthesis contract fuses them. No
repository merge is performed by this skill.

Active review paths use only --synthesize/fusion language. Add portability only when contexts, parallelism, slash commands or tier controls are unavailable. docs/workflow/REPOSITORY_STATE.md is evidence for output/guardrails, not a skill reference; that route owns NRS and Architectural invariants rules.

Resources are one hop from this file. Fixed reviewer/synthesis/output contracts are literal. Missing required resource → stop; never approximate a review contract.

Portability

Keep reviewer contexts isolated. Use portability for sequential/headless fallbacks; never collapse independent adversarial passes.

Relationship to other skills

Orchestrates internal finders (review-code, review-security, review-verify, review-design, review-a11y, review-brand, review-perf, review-seo), then one review-implementation classifier and review-debt transform, isolated by default; installed platform packs are optional. triage-issue is user-invoked, never auto-run (D3), for independent proposals, audit findings, and --prioritize-now runs. It is Stage 4: checkpoint reviews are optional, the end review is mandatory and fresh. fix-now is routed to the unit's fold cycle — a separate /fold-findings invocation, never run by this review; replan-in-unit adds user-confirmed phases, and independent work becomes proposals. audit-pr consumes only the verified PR-comment receipt, never the chat report; product-audit is the periodic sweep. On REVIEW-FAIL the manual correction path is /fold-findings, then re-run /review-change on the changed HEAD (bounded at two cycles — a third cycle never starts without an explicit user instruction, per REVIEW_PROCESS.md); a programmatic outer driver may run the same review→fold sequence.

Done when

  • One synthesized/classified table covers every applicable axis, lists skipped axes with reasons, and includes manual checks. Every finding has a destination: fold, confirmed replan phase, surfaced decision, or user-routed proposal; none is silently lost and review creates no backlog (D3). Print the closing → Next: block (clean → /audit-pr; recurring drift → /product-audit) and change no code.

Comments

Markdown supported