elan6666 Byte Review
Review the actual artifact and evidence. Choose review dimensions based on what could realistically make the result wrong, harmful, confusing, or incomplete.
Method
- Establish the intended behavior and scope.
- Check relevant active lessons for repeated mistakes.
- Inspect relevant code, files, runtime behavior, tests, or sources.
- Prioritize concrete findings by impact and confidence.
- Distinguish confirmed defects from risks, preferences, and missing evidence.
- Recommend changes that materially improve the outcome.
Possible lenses include product fit, UX, correctness, architecture, maintainability, security, privacy, performance, testing, market evidence, and delivery readiness. Do not simulate a meeting or force every role to comment.
For code review, lead with actionable findings tied to precise locations. For a product review, lead with the decision or highest-impact gap. If there are no material findings, say so and note meaningful verification limits.
Write a review artifact only when it will be tracked or used for later iteration. Do not require a verdict schema, a fixed number of findings, or a Byte OS state transition.
When review evidence confirms a reusable mistake, false completion claim, or
requirement misunderstanding, update the matching .byte-os/LESSONS.md entry
with evidence and a prevention rule, not blame.
Source And Updates
Canonical repository: elan6666/your-bytedance-skills. Use its current main branch when checking for or installing updates.