Review Core

Review core

The shared review engine: blind critics → tribunal → adversarial validation. Predictability over improvisation.

Parent skills usually invoke review-core; direct local branch review is also supported.

Requires sibling install of this skill when using review-tribunal or ticket-to-pr-pipeline.

Mode

Parents must set mode before running:

Code exploration

All phases and subagents follow EXPLORATION.md. Paste those rules into every critic and validator prompt.

Before Step 1, the caller fills this source manifest and reuses it unchanged across critics, validators, and scorecards:

Target: {TARGET}
Repo: {FULL_REPO_PATH}
Branch: {BRANCH_OR_DETACHED}
Head: {HEAD_SHA}
Diff source: {EXACT_PR_RANGE_COMMIT_OR_WORKTREE_SOURCE}
Working-tree components: {STAGED | UNSTAGED | UNTRACKED | NONE}
Commands: {EXACT_READ_ONLY_SOURCE_COMMANDS}
Changed files: {DEDUPLICATED_LIST}
Commits in range: {COUNT | 0}
Commit SHAs: {LIST | N/A}
Commit commands: {commands that produced the list | N/A}

Step 1 — Blind critics

Spawn parallel blind judges — ticket + diff + intel facts only; no implementer rationale.

Details: BLIND-REVIEW.md.

• Pick distinct lenses from the roster; floor ≥2 independent critics.
• Alternatives critic is required for mode: review; default for mode: implement unless diff is trivial (note skip on scorecard).
• Manifest lists commits → spawn hygiene critic per COMMIT-HYGIENE.md.
• Paste EXPLORATION.md rules into every subagent prompt.

Completion criterion: ≥2 independent reviews returned; wrong-diff reviews discarded; skipped roster lenses noted with reason.

Step 2 — First tribunal

You are the judge, not the author's advocate. For every material finding: Holds up / Reject / Defer.

Details: TRIBUNAL.md. Alternative proposals: ALTERNATIVES.md.

Verify claims with Read / Grep / Glob before ruling.

Publish a scorecard to the user (finding → verdict → why). In review mode, hand findings to the parent only after adversarial validation; in implement mode, wait for validation before changing code.

Completion criterion: every material finding has an explicit verdict; user can see the audit trail.

Step 3 — Adversarial validation

Spawn a second wave tasked with disproving or downgrading the Holds up items; confirmation must overcome counter-evidence.

Details: ADVERSARIAL.md.

Feed validators: the finding, first-tribunal rationale, ticket/AC, sibling-repo paths, and any Atlassian/FE evidence already gathered.

Re-adjudicate after validators return. Overturn freely when evidence wins.

Completion criterion: each prior Hold has a CONFIRMED / DOWNGRADE / REJECT / UPGRADE verdict with evidence; revised scorecard published.

After review-core

Checklist

- [ ] Blind critics (≥2 distinct lenses; alternatives unless trivial skip noted; hygiene run or skip noted)
- [ ] First tribunal scorecard
- [ ] Adversarial validation + revised scorecard
- [ ] Parent handoff (target-specific review delivery or implement fixes)