|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
|
|
|
+# Scoped Re-Review Prompt Template
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Use this template when dispatching a re-review after a fix round. The
|
|
|
+re-reviewer verifies the findings were addressed and checks the fix diff for
|
|
|
+new breakage. It is not a fresh review — the full review already happened.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+**Purpose:** Verify each finding from the previous review was addressed, and
|
|
|
+that the fix itself broke nothing.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+```
|
|
|
+Subagent (general-purpose):
|
|
|
+ description: "Re-review Task N fix round R"
|
|
|
+ model: [MODEL — REQUIRED: choose per SKILL.md Model Selection; an omitted
|
|
|
+ model silently inherits the session's most expensive one]
|
|
|
+ prompt: |
|
|
|
+ You are re-reviewing one task's fix round. A previous review produced
|
|
|
+ findings; an implementer has attempted to fix them. Your job is to
|
|
|
+ verdict each finding and inspect the fix diff — nothing else.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ ## The Task
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ Read the task brief: [BRIEF_FILE]
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ ## The Findings Under Verification
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ [FINDINGS]
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ ## The Fix
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ Read the implementer's report (fix reports are appended at the end):
|
|
|
+ [REPORT_FILE]
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ **Fix base:** [FIX_BASE_SHA] (the head the previous review saw)
|
|
|
+ **Head:** [HEAD_SHA]
|
|
|
+ **Diff file:** [DIFF_FILE]
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ Read the diff file once — it contains the fix commits, a stat summary,
|
|
|
+ and the fix diff with surrounding context. Do not re-run git commands.
|
|
|
+ If the diff file is missing, fetch the diff yourself:
|
|
|
+ `git diff --stat [FIX_BASE_SHA]..[HEAD_SHA]` and
|
|
|
+ `git diff [FIX_BASE_SHA]..[HEAD_SHA]`.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ Your review is read-only on this checkout. Do not mutate the working
|
|
|
+ tree, the index, HEAD, or branch state in any way.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ ## Scope
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ Your scope is the findings list and the fix diff. Verdict every finding.
|
|
|
+ Inspect the fix diff for new problems the fix itself introduced. Do NOT
|
|
|
+ re-review code the fix did not touch: if you notice an issue entirely
|
|
|
+ outside the fix diff, report it under Out-of-Scope Observations — it
|
|
|
+ does not block this task and does not extend the loop. A broad
|
|
|
+ whole-branch review happens after all tasks are complete.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ ## Tests
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ The implementer re-ran the tests covering the amended code and appended
|
|
|
+ the results to the report file. Treat the report as unverified claims:
|
|
|
+ confirm the fix report names the covering tests and shows their output,
|
|
|
+ and verify the claims against the diff. Do not re-run the suite to
|
|
|
+ confirm their report. Run a test only when reading the code raises a
|
|
|
+ specific doubt that no existing run answers — and then a focused test,
|
|
|
+ never a package-wide suite.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ ## Output Format
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ Your final message is the report itself: begin directly with the first
|
|
|
+ finding's verdict. Every line is a verdict, a finding with file:line,
|
|
|
+ or a check you ran — no preamble, no process narration.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ ### Finding Verdicts
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ For each finding in The Findings Under Verification, in order:
|
|
|
+ - **[finding one-liner]** — ADDRESSED | NOT ADDRESSED, with file:line
|
|
|
+ evidence. "Attempted" is not addressed: the specific defect must no
|
|
|
+ longer exist.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ ### New Breakage in the Fix Diff
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ Anything the fix itself broke or introduced, with severity
|
|
|
+ (Critical/Important/Minor) and file:line. "None" if clean.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ ### Out-of-Scope Observations
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ Issues you noticed entirely outside the fix diff. Non-blocking; the
|
|
|
+ controller ledgers these for the final review. "None" if none.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ ### Verdict
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ **Fix round:** [All findings addressed, no new Critical/Important
|
|
|
+ breakage | Findings remain open] — list the open ones.
|
|
|
+```
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+**Placeholders:**
|
|
|
+- `[MODEL]` — REQUIRED: reviewer model per SKILL.md Model Selection; scoped
|
|
|
+ re-reviews of small fix diffs take a cheap-to-mid tier
|
|
|
+- `[BRIEF_FILE]` — the task brief file (same file the implementer worked from)
|
|
|
+- `[FINDINGS]` — the Critical/Important findings and spec gaps from the
|
|
|
+ previous review, copied verbatim, one per bullet
|
|
|
+- `[REPORT_FILE]` — the implementer's report file (fix reports appended)
|
|
|
+- `[FIX_BASE_SHA]` — the head the previous review saw
|
|
|
+- `[HEAD_SHA]` — current commit
|
|
|
+- `[DIFF_FILE]` — the path `scripts/review-package FIX_BASE HEAD` printed
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+**Re-reviewer returns:** per-finding verdicts (ADDRESSED / NOT ADDRESSED),
|
|
|
+new breakage in the fix diff, out-of-scope observations, and a round verdict.
|