iinit
This commit is contained in:
69
.agents/skills/review/SKILL.md
Normal file
69
.agents/skills/review/SKILL.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: review
|
||||
description: Review the changes since a fixed point (commit, branch, tag, or merge-base) along two axes — Standards (does the code follow this repo's documented coding standards?) and Spec (does the code match what the originating issue/PRD asked for?). Runs both reviews in parallel sub-agents and reports them side by side. Use when the user wants to review a branch, a PR, work-in-progress changes, or asks to "review since X".
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Two-axis review of the diff between `HEAD` and a fixed point the user supplies:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Standards** — does the code conform to this repo's documented coding standards?
|
||||
- **Spec** — does the code faithfully implement the originating issue / PRD / spec?
|
||||
|
||||
Both axes run as **parallel sub-agents** so they don't pollute each other's context, then this skill aggregates their findings.
|
||||
|
||||
The issue tracker should have been provided to you — run `/setup-matt-pocock-skills` if `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md` is missing.
|
||||
|
||||
## Process
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Pin the fixed point
|
||||
|
||||
Whatever the user said is the fixed point — a commit SHA, branch name, tag, `main`, `HEAD~5`, etc. If they didn't specify one, ask for it.
|
||||
|
||||
Capture the diff command once: `git diff <fixed-point>...HEAD` (three-dot, so the comparison is against the merge-base). Also note the list of commits via `git log <fixed-point>..HEAD --oneline`.
|
||||
|
||||
Before going further, confirm the fixed point resolves (`git rev-parse <fixed-point>`) and the diff is non-empty. A bad ref or empty diff should fail here — not inside two parallel sub-agents.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Identify the spec source
|
||||
|
||||
Look for the originating spec, in this order:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Issue references in the commit messages (`#123`, `Closes #45`, GitLab `!67`, etc.) — fetch via the workflow in `docs/agents/issue-tracker.md`.
|
||||
2. A path the user passed as an argument.
|
||||
3. A PRD/spec file under `docs/`, `specs/`, or `.scratch/` matching the branch name or feature.
|
||||
4. If nothing is found, ask the user where the spec is. If they say there isn't one, the **Spec** sub-agent will skip and report "no spec available".
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Identify the standards sources
|
||||
|
||||
Anything in the repo that documents how code should be written, such as `CODING_STANDARDS.md` or `CONTRIBUTING.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Spawn both sub-agents in parallel
|
||||
|
||||
Send a single message with two `Agent` tool calls. Use the `general-purpose` subagent for both.
|
||||
|
||||
**Standards sub-agent prompt** — include:
|
||||
|
||||
- The full diff command and commit list.
|
||||
- The list of standards-source files you found in step 3.
|
||||
- The brief: "Report — per file/hunk where relevant — every place the diff violates a documented standard. Cite the standard (file + the rule). Distinguish hard violations from judgement calls. Skip anything tooling enforces. Under 400 words."
|
||||
|
||||
**Spec sub-agent prompt** — include:
|
||||
|
||||
- The diff command and commit list.
|
||||
- The path or fetched contents of the spec.
|
||||
- The brief: "Report: (a) requirements the spec asked for that are missing or partial; (b) behaviour in the diff that wasn't asked for (scope creep); (c) requirements that look implemented but where the implementation looks wrong. Quote the spec line for each finding. Under 400 words."
|
||||
|
||||
If the spec is missing, skip the Spec sub-agent and note this in the final report.
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Aggregate
|
||||
|
||||
Present the two reports under `## Standards` and `## Spec` headings, verbatim or lightly cleaned. Do **not** merge or rerank findings — the two axes are deliberately separate (see _Why two axes_).
|
||||
|
||||
End with a one-line summary: total findings per axis, and the worst issue _within each axis_ (if any). Don't pick a single winner across axes — that's the reranking the separation exists to prevent.
|
||||
|
||||
## Why two axes
|
||||
|
||||
A change can pass one axis and fail the other:
|
||||
|
||||
- Code that follows every standard but implements the wrong thing → **Standards pass, Spec fail.**
|
||||
- Code that does exactly what the issue asked but breaks the project's conventions → **Spec pass, Standards fail.**
|
||||
|
||||
Reporting them separately stops one axis from masking the other.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user