Deepworkplan Addon AI Diff Reviewer

DeepWorkPlan — AI Diff Reviewer Addon

Connect the target repo to the AI Diff Reviewer (GitHub repo DailybotHQ/ai-diff-reviewer, marketplace listing "AI Diff Reviewer", current v2.0.0) so DWP work — the mandatory Security Review final task — is augmented with a structured local review (verdict + findings table + severity), and (in Flow B, optionally) every pull request to the target repo is gated by a CI-side review Action pinned to the same tag for byte-identical parity. This is an opt-in addon; it is never required for a repo to be AI-first. Missing skill/extension or invocation errors never block the work; critical findings from a completed local review still follow the existing Security Review contract (block until fixed or explicitly accepted).

The rule that overrides everything: this addon DEFERS, it does not reinvent

The upstream DailybotHQ/ai-diff-reviewer skill (currently v2.0.0) already owns install, review methodology, the CI-workflow wizard, the extension-file authoring flow, the PR-body drafting flow, and the post-CI apply-review walkthrough — as five coordinated sub-skills (parent default flow, generate-extension, setup, open-pr, apply-review). This addon's job is narrow: (1) offer to install the vendored skill through its own consent flow, (2) ask whether the consumer wants Flow A (local-only) or Flow B (dual-surface) — never guess, matching the upstream skill's own ambiguity tie-break policy, (3) if Flow B, defer to the upstream setup sub-skill for the CI workflow, and (4) wire the parent default flow into DWP create/execute so the mandatory Security Review is augmented with a local review pass, plus (Flow B only) surface apply-review as an available companion for post-CI walkthrough. It MUST NOT duplicate, bypass, or weaken any upstream consent, auth, wizard, or review flow — it points at them. (Normative source: SPEC.md.)

Positioning guardrail (read before anything)

The core DeepWorkPlan methodology has ZERO AI Diff Reviewer dependency. It is vendor-neutral, MIT, and agent-agnostic. A repo with zero addons — including this one — is fully conformant. This addon adds structured code-review quality to DWP work for developers who want it; declining leaves a fully AI-first repo. Never present the AI Diff Reviewer as a precondition for DWP, and never auto-install it for everyone.

Two officially-supported adoption flows

The upstream skill (v2.0.0+) defines two flows and requires consumers to pick explicitly. This addon MUST offer both at consent time and MUST NOT default to either.

Parity guarantee (Flow B). The upstream skill's prompt.md is byte-identical to the Action's shipped prompts/default.md at the same release tag (enforced by the upstream Skills — prompt-sync invariant CI job). Pinning the same version on both surfaces guarantees identical reviews. When setup wires prompt-extension-file: .review/extension.md, the CI Action reads the same file your local agent uses → same base prompt + same extension = same review, locally and in CI.

Read these first (all relative inside the skill)

• SPEC.md — the normative (RFC-2119) contract: two flows, what is installed (all opt-in), how auth is deferred, how the Security Review augmentation is wired, the optional apply-review companion, the never-block rule, and the vendor-neutral guardrail.
• templates/INTEGRATION.md — reasoning guidance (NOT copy-paste): detect-if-already-installed, how to ask for the flow, how to wire the Security Review augmentation, and the consent / never-block rules.
• ../README.md — the addon mechanism (opt-in, reconcile-don't-clobber, contract).

When this runs

• From onboard Phase 7b — after the core AI-first scaffolding, onboard offers this addon alongside devcontainer / dailybot / dependency-upgrade / design-system; if accepted it reads this SKILL and runs the flow below.
• Directly — /deepworkplan-addon-ai-diff-reviewer on an already-onboarded repo to add the review integration.

Trust boundary (write scope)

allowed-tools includes write-capable Edit and Write. Exactly what this addon may write — and what it MUST NOT — is enumerated below. Skills.sh / Gen Agent Trust Hub treat allowed-tools as a trust boundary; this section is the human-readable contract for that field. Anything not listed here does not happen.

Reads (always allowed, no consent needed):

• Local files under the current git checkout via Read / Grep / Glob / Bash (detection only: existence of .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/, extension-file paths, pr-review.yml, .review/.skip-bootstrap).
• Upstream sub-skill docs under .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/** once installed (to hand off correctly).

Writes (only after explicit developer acceptance of the relevant step):

• Vendored skill install — via npx --yes skills add <repo>@<tag> … -y / npx --yes skills update … -y into .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/ + skills-lock.json. Installs are tag-pinned (Step 1); never run without Step 1 consent.
• Extension file — hand off to upstream generate-extension (writes .review/extension.md or a consumer-chosen path). This addon itself does NOT invent severity rules; it only triggers the upstream sub-skill after the developer accepts the bootstrap offer.
• CI workflow (Flow B only) — hand off to upstream setup (writes .github/workflows/pr-review.yml and related labels). This addon itself does NOT hand-roll the workflow or invent provider secrets.
• AGENTS.md / docs notes (optional) — a short pointer that the addon is installed and which flow was chosen, only when the developer accepts a docs-update prompt. Reconcile; never clobber existing sections.
• Plan-time Security Review append — during execute, append the local review output under ## AI Diff Reviewer local review in analysis_results/SECURITY_REVIEW.md (plan working state, typically gitignored). Never rewrite the rest of that file.

It MUST NOT:

• Store, echo, or commit provider secrets (CURSOR_API_KEY, API tokens).
• Pipe a remote installer into a shell (any single-line fetch-and-execute variant).
• Auto-install for everyone or default to Flow B when the flow question is unanswered.
• Clobber an existing .review/extension.md, pr-review.yml, or vendored skill — reconcile gaps only.
• git commit / git push as part of the addon flow (those belong to the surrounding DWP execute / maintainer workflow).
• Edit source files under the consumer's application tree — review findings are applied (if at all) by the upstream apply-review sub-skill under its own per-finding consent contract, not by this addon.

Supply-chain trust (what a "yes" actually installs)

This addon delegates to third-party artifacts, so the trust chain is stated explicitly rather than implied:

Nothing else is fetched. There is no telemetry, no post-install script, and no runtime download by this addon itself; the only network action it can prompt for is the consent-gated, tag-pinned skills add/skills update above.

The flow

Step 0 — Consent + recommend-only-if-relevant + choose the flow

1. Confirm relevance. Offer this addon only when it makes sense: the developer or team wants structured code-review quality on DWP work, or explicitly asks for local pre-push review or PR merge-gating. In trust/auto mode you MAY recommend it only on that signal — do not auto-install for everyone. If the developer declines, stop cleanly; the repo stays baseline-conformant.

2. Ask the flow question — do NOT guess. This matches upstream v2.0.0's own ambiguity tie-break policy. Present both flows plainly:

   This addon supports two adoption modes:

   Flow A — local-only. Vendored skill + a repo-tailored extension file (via generate-extension); no GitHub Actions changes. Best for personal or experimental repos, or teams not (yet) ready for automated PR review. Once both are present, the DWP Security Review is augmented with a local review pass — skill alone is not enough.

   Flow B — dual-surface. Skill + CI Action, both reading the same .review/extension.md for byte-identical parity. Every PR to main gets an AI review in CI, gated on a label of your choice (typical: ready). Recommended for team repos.

   Which flow?

   If the signal is unclear, ask; never default to Flow B (installing the workflow unrequested is a much bigger footprint than declining Flow B and only using the local review).

3. Detect existing setup (reconcile-don't-clobber). Before installing anything, check what is already present (see templates/INTEGRATION.md):

   • Vendored skill already installed at .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/?
   • Extension file at one of the three recognized paths (in precedence order): .review/extension.md > .github/ai-diff-reviewer/extension.md

     .github/ai-pr-reviewer/extension.md (pre-v1.5 back-compat)?

   • .review/.skip-bootstrap marker present (developer opted out of the bootstrap offer previously — respect it)?
   • .github/workflows/pr-review.yml or any workflow with uses: DailybotHQ/ai-diff-reviewer (or the pre-rename DailybotHQ/ai-pr-reviewer — the 301 redirect keeps old pins working)?
   • Provider secret documented anywhere (typical: CURSOR_API_KEY)?

   If a piece already exists, do not redo it — record it and only fill gaps.

Step 1 — Offer the vendored skill install (OPT-IN, defer consent)

Present the install path and let the developer choose; never run an installer without their explicit acceptance.

• Vendored coding-agent skill (recommended — brings the five-sub-skill router and the byte-identical prompt parity guarantee; current v2.0.0):
  • npx --yes skills add DailybotHQ/ai-diff-reviewer@v2.0.0 --skill ai-diff-reviewer -y (pinned to a published tag; vendors into .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/ and records source + content hash in skills-lock.json; both --yes and -y are required — --yes covers npm's own prompt, subcommand -y covers the skills CLI's own "Which agents do you want to install to?" picker, which hangs in non-TTY without it — upstream fixed this in v1.7.0).
  • Bump to the latest published tag with npx --yes skills update ai-diff-reviewer -y.

Do not reimplement the install, and never pipe a remote installer to a shell. The npx skills command is the supported, checksummed install path — it records the content hash in skills-lock.json for reproducible restores.

Step 1b — Bootstrap the extension file (REQUIRED for both flows)

Security Review detection (SPEC §6.1 / create / execute) requires skill + an extension file at one of the three recognized paths. Do not finish addon onboarding without one — otherwise every later Security Review will warn "install incomplete" and skip the local pass.

1. If an extension already exists at a recognized path → record it; do not clobber (and do not migrate fallback/back-compat paths silently — ask).
2. If .review/.skip-bootstrap is present → the developer previously opted out. Respect it: document that the local SR augmentation will not fire until they remove the marker and create an extension; do not surprise- bootstrap later during execute.
3. Otherwise → hand off to upstream generate-extension (or let the developer hand-write .review/extension.md) before proceeding to Step 2 / Step 3. Preferred handoff: "generate a .review/extension.md for this repo".

Mid-plan execute MUST NOT surprise-bootstrap an extension — that is an onboarding concern, not a Security Review side effect.

Step 2 — CI workflow install — DEFER to the upstream setup sub-skill (Flow B only)

Do not hand-roll .github/workflows/pr-review.yml, do not prompt for API keys, and do not store any credential. When the developer chose Flow B, hand off to the upstream setup sub-skill — its 6-question wizard produces a workflow tuned to the consumer's choices (provider / strictness / trigger mode / external-contributor policy / PR-description mode / complexity labels), and setup/reference.md doubles as the reference manual for every action.yml input.

• Point at the vendored skill: .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/setup/SKILL.md.
• Handoff phrase: "Set up AI Diff Reviewer for this repo" (or /ai-diff-reviewer-setup) — workflow + label bootstrap only. Step 1b already required the extension file for both flows; do not re-enter generate-extension here unless Step 1b was skipped (e.g. explicit .review/.skip-bootstrap opt-out and the developer later reversed it).
• Provider secret: the wizard tells the maintainer which secret to configure (typical: CURSOR_API_KEY for the Cursor provider). Maintainer sets it at Settings > Secrets and variables > Actions.

The addon MUST NOT reimplement the wizard. If the developer wants to skip the wizard, templates/INTEGRATION.md provides a fallback shape and points at the reference manual — but the wizard is the primary path.

Step 3 — Wire the Security Review augmentation into DWP execution

This is the integration value. Reasoning guidance is in templates/INTEGRATION.md — adapt it to the repo; do not copy verbatim.

• Add a short, clearly-optional note to the repo's DWP execution docs (the generated AGENTS.md reporting section and/or docs/AI_AGENT_COLLAB.md) describing that when this addon is installed, the mandatory {N-2}.task_security_review.md template gains an additional post-existing-checks step:

  1. Local review augmentation (both flows) — invoke the upstream parent default flow ("Review my current branch"). Capture verdict + findings table + per-finding body + notes + recommendation. Append to analysis_results/SECURITY_REVIEW.md under a dedicated ## AI Diff Reviewer local review heading. A critical finding follows the existing SR contract — blocks completion until fixed or explicitly accepted. warning / info findings are appended and reported but do not block.

  2. Optional post-CI walkthrough companion (Flow B only) — after the plan's PR has been pushed and CI has reviewed it, the developer MAY invoke the upstream apply-review sub-skill from within the same execute session to walk through CI findings per-finding (apply / defer / skip) with explicit consent. apply-review is read-only by default; source-file edits require an explicit yes per finding; it never commits and never pushes. This is surfaced as an available option, not a new plan task file — the addon MUST NOT insert an apply-review task into any plan.

• Every hook MUST be best-effort and conditional: the local Security Review pass fires only when the vendored skill is present and an extension file is detected, and it MUST NOT block create or execute if the skill is absent, detection fails, or the local review invocation errors — warn once and continue (see SPEC §7 Never-block). Do not skip the local pass because a CI provider secret is unset; that secret is Flow B CI / gate messaging only.

• The reviewer's .review/extension.md (repo-tailored via the upstream generate-extension sub-skill, either through the bootstrap offer or invoked explicitly) shapes what maps to which severity. This is the primary customization surface; consumers who want repo-specific review rules author them here.

Step 4 — Validate (SPEC §9 Validation)

Run the validation checklist and report: whether the vendored skill is present with the correct version, whether an extension file is present at one of the three recognized paths, whether (Flow B) the workflow file is present with the upstream Action pinned to @v2, whether the provider secret is documented in AGENTS.md, whether the stable-named gate job (if Flow B) is AI review gate for branch protection, and any deferred items. If nothing could be installed here (sandbox/CI), say why — do not silently skip, and do not fail the onboarding.

Failure-mode guardrails

• Never required; invocation never blocking. If declined — or if the vendored skill is missing, detection fails, or the local review invocation errors — stop/continue cleanly. The repo stays baseline-conformant. Once a local review ran, open critical findings still block Security Review completion until fixed or explicitly accepted (SPEC §6.1 / §7). An unset CI provider secret does not skip the local Security Review pass (Flow B CI/gate only).
• Defer to upstream. No wizard reimplementation, no review-methodology reimplementation, no apply-review reimplementation. Point at the vendored sub-skills.
• Verified install only. Never recommend piping a remote installer to a shell. Use npx --yes skills add <repo>@<tag> … -y — the tag pin plus skills-lock.json content-hash verification is what makes the install reproducible and auditable.
• Reconcile, don't clobber. An existing extension file, workflow, or vendored skill is preserved; only fill gaps. Never migrate a file at .github/ai-diff-reviewer/extension.md (or the back-compat .github/ai-pr-reviewer/extension.md) to .review/extension.md silently — ask.
• Vendor-neutral. Never imply DWP needs the AI Diff Reviewer. This addon is purely additive review quality.
• Both flows are first-class. Flow A (local-only) is a supported use case, not a degraded mode. The addon MUST ask; MUST NOT default to Flow B.