# Nw Review

> Dispatches an independent reviewer for a durable authority, immutable oracle, candidate diff, charter set, or operational artifact.

- Skill: `nwave-ai/nw-review-2` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add nwave-ai/nw-review-2`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/nwave-ai/nw-review-2/raw
- Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS)
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: nWave-ai (https://skillmd.com/u/nwave-ai)
- Updated: 2026-09-21
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/nwave-ai/nw-review-2

---


# NW-REVIEW

Select the reviewer that owns the artifact class. Give it the actual
repository-relative artifact or actual diff, not copied prose.

Reviews are read-only and adversarial. Every finding cites a file/line,
terminal command or exhibited counterexample. `APPROVE` requires the artifact
to survive every applicable check; missing or stale evidence is
`INDETERMINATE`, not approval.

Review durable product/design authority at its owner, acceptance oracles with
the acceptance-designer reviewer, implementation diffs with the crafter
reviewer, charters with the PO reviewer, and platform artifacts with the
platform reviewer. A reviewer may veto but never silently repair the artifact.

Return the verdict, reviewed artifact or diff, findings and the single upstream
owner for each required correction.

## Convergence

A review converges only against a CLOSED criterion set. Four rules, all binding.

- **Declared before, not chosen during.** The dispatcher states the closed set of
  criteria in the dispatch, and the reviewer judges those and nothing else. Where an
  executable reference model exists, the set is "the surface agrees with the model"
  plus the named suites; anything outside it is not review material. A criterion the
  reviewer invents mid-review is out of scope, however true it is.
- **Blocking is a narrow class.** A finding blocks only when it breaks the product or
  would let a falsehood be integrated. Everything else is a note, corrected inside the
  same slice, and never triggers a re-review.
- **Measured stopping rule.** When a round finds defects only INSIDE the previous
  round's repair, the cycle stops and the work integrates. Each round declares its
  gain: how many blocking findings, and where each one originated.
- **A repair adds no new prose.** Repair is production, so new sentences are new
  unverified surface. If a fact is worth stating, it is a test; see
  `authoring:a-measurable-fact-is-a-test-not-prose` in `nw-cross-cutting-invariants`.

## Design-review question set

Structure (algebra) and time (protocol) questions that make a design review
adversarial instead of confirmatory. Finds structural incoherence, never
temporal holes -- a temporal gap needs the model checker (T5), not this list.

**Structure (algebra):**

- **S1** [INSPECTIVE] -- for every finite sum type, list the cases and pair
  each with its domain meaning; flag any case with no meaning and any
  meaning split across cases.
- **S2** [MECHANICAL] -- for every pair of invariants mentioning the same
  field, construct a state satisfying the first and check the second,
  delegated to a property test; "I couldn't find one" is not evidence.
- **S3** [MECHANICAL] -- for every invariant proven under an added
  hypothesis, remove the hypothesis and verify a counterexample still
  exists; if none exists the hypothesis was decorative, and the
  conditional theorem was the signal a type was needed.
- **S4** [INSPECTIVE] -- every unreachable arm of a total function must be
  made unreachable by the type, never by a comment.

**Time (protocol):**

- **T5** [MECHANICAL] -- declared progress/liveness: show do-nothing;
  model-check liveness excludes it; safety-only: `NOT_APPLICABLE`.
- **T6** [INSPECTIVE] -- name every fairness assumption's real guarantor,
  monitor, and violation consequence.
- **T7** [JUDGEMENT] -- list every model step and name the real code
  mechanism guaranteeing its atomicity; the answer must be a code
  reference, never prose. If it cannot be named, the review returns the
  QUESTION to the human, not a verdict.

**Marking rule (three values, load-bearing):** MECHANICAL = a tool answers,
the outcome is a fact -- if the tool was not executed, the review is
INCOMPLETE BY CONSTRUCTION, never approvable. INSPECTIVE = no tool, but the
answer is a fact readable on the artifact. JUDGEMENT = the answer is a
question returned to the human, never a verdict.