Review

---
name: review
description: Review a plan, diff, or roadmap slice; findings land on it.
version: 2.0.0
argument-hint: "--surface plan|diff|roadmap"
allowed-tools: ["Read","Write","Edit","Bash","Grep","Glob","Agent","Skill","AskUserQuestion","TaskCreate","TaskUpdate","TaskGet","TaskList"]
---

# coordinator:review

**Trigger:** a reviewable artifact exists — a plan/design doc/RFC, a code change, or a roadmap spine/sprint slice — outgoing when nothing on it has been reviewed yet, incoming when a reviewer's findings have landed.

**When NOT to use:** frozen weekly diff at `/workweek-complete` Step 7 → `coordinator:parallel-code-review`. Stuck/oscillating → self-monitor, don't dispatch a reviewer. Pure mechanical citation check, no Opus → `docs-checker` directly. `--surface plan` mid-drafting, `--surface diff` mid-implementation, or `--surface roadmap` before the PM has shape-approved the spine → keep working. A finding about how one stub will be BUILT is plan altitude, not roadmap altitude → route it to that stub's own plan review. `--surface diff` pure test-output classification → capture stdout/stderr to a file, dispatch `test-evidence-parser` on it.

`--surface` is resolved before this skill loads. Pre-flight checks, reviewer-tier precedence, sequencing exceptions, and prior-art mutability are retrieved by `review-assemble brief`, scoped to the resolved surface (segment set: `coordinator/skills/review/residue/`).

**Dispatch authorization — invoking this skill IS the request.** The dispatches named below are constitutive steps of this skill, not a separate thing to get cleared: invoking a skill requests the actions that skill performs. A harness line permitting dispatch "unless the user requested it" is therefore **satisfied here, not overridden** — no precedence claim is needed and none is made. Re-asking spends the very context the dispatch exists to protect. The rule attaches to skill entry and dissolves no PM-authored gate: keyword-gated skills gate entry, and every gate a skill names for itself still binds — per-session cross-repo-commit assent, ask-before-external-action, and any other this skill's own body names. Tripwire: `UNATTRIBUTED-HARNESS-LINE-IS-NOT-PM`.

---

## Branch A — Outgoing

_A reviewable artifact exists for `--surface`, no reviewer invoked yet this iteration._

### A.1 — Pre-flight

**Diff freeze:** only the caller knows the intended range — `code-reviewer` never selects its own. Freeze via `freeze-review-diff` with the caller-chosen range and slice-id before dispatch; never default a shared `work/*` branch to `origin/main...HEAD` (sweeps in sibling sessions' reviewed commits). Inject the frozen diff path as the primary dispatch artifact.

**Reviewers don't execute.** Bash is read-only inspection — no interpreter, scratch files, or test runs. A runtime claim gets the EM running the probe before dispatch and pasting its output into the brief as evidence, never a task. The verdict's `executed: <yes|no>` discloses whether a WARN was empirically checked or hand-traced.

### A.2 — Reviewer selection and dispatch

<!-- engine-gap: field=review.reviewer_selection producer=unknown memo=engine-gap-markers-name-a-memo-that-was-never-filed.md -->
Reviewer selection (routing-table match, tier precedence, effort) is a signal-lookup a program can compute; no producer AUTOMATES it yet — the plan carries the input, nothing yet merges it at dispatch time. Until then:

- **Routing table:** merge `coordinator/routing.md` with every enabled plugin's `routing.md` fragments into one composite table; match signals to identify Reviewer 1 (domain specialist) and Reviewer 2 (generalist, if needed) — same table both surfaces.
- **Read `review_signals` off the plan first.** Resolve each id through `coordinator/contract/review-signals.json`. An id present in `review_signals` but ABSENT from the contract surfaces loudly (name it; do not proceed as if unset). Hand-matching the routing table against prose is the fallback only for a plan with **no** `review_signals` field.
- **Tier precedence** (Sonnet-vs-Opus, single-vs-cross-domain) is surface-specific, assembled by `review-assemble brief`.
- **Effort is PM-gated, not an EM dial.** `routing.md`'s Effort field is PM-facing reference only — never put a level in a dispatch prompt or narrate one unless the PM named it.
- **the Director of Engineering:** cross-team/consumer-leak signal → dispatch standalone as primary (director-altitude posture in brief; no `mode` arg), skip the Staff Engineer. Chained-after-the Staff Engineer ("backstop") is the High-effort-architectural routing entry, not the Director of Engineering's only mode.
- `--reviewers "name1,name2"` skips auto-detection; report "PM-directed review: [name1] then [name2]."
- **Tier vs. complexity, not importance:** one reviewer suffices unless a second would likely *contradict*, not just add diminishing-return notes.

**Pipeline phases** (docs-checker, prior-art-checker/plan-coverage-checker, external-pattern-checker, backstop, report) aren't optional — walk them inline per the surface's assembled phase list. The reviewer applies its own findings; there is no separate integrate phase.

**Persist findings on the pre-provisioned sidecar** (`state/subagent-share/<session>/<provision_key>.md`, already in the dispatch brief — `staff-eng-review` for personas, `review-findings` for `code-reviewer`) via **Edit**, not a Bash redirect or hand-scaffold.

**Persona/Opus reviewer** applies every finding in place, writes the `## Findings Ledger` to its sidecar, runs `review-findings-ledger verify --sidecar <path>`, and returns `DONE: <sidecar-path> | verdict: <OK|WARN|BLOCKED> | findings: <N>`; the EM reads the applied diff and the verified ledger. `code-reviewer`'s diff-only Sonnet pattern is assembled by the op.

**Multi-reviewer chain:** each reviewer gets its own provisioned sidecar, applies its own findings, and verifies its own ledger against its returned path. A trivial/unfilled returned sidecar fails loud (BLOCKED) at intake.

### A.3 — Sequencing

**Code review (a diff) is one parallel wave, and every reviewer applies its own findings.**
Slice owners, Kira and the named personas all apply in place with exact-text `Edit`s, including
findings outside their own slice (no write against stale text: an exact-text `Edit` fails rather
than clobbers). Only a rebuild verdict goes back to the EM; there is no second review round. This
runs inside the execute workflow's review stage (`coordinator/skills/execute-plan/SKILL.md`); a
diff reviewed ad hoc (`/review-code`) applies and verifies its own ledger before a second
reviewer touches it.

**Plan review over one plan artifact stays ordered.** Reviewers apply their findings in place on
the plan body, so Reviewer 1 applies and verifies its own findings before Reviewer 2 is dispatched.
This is unchanged: only code review over a diff runs as a parallel wave.

**Pre-flight sidecars are consumed alongside the plan**, never inserted into that chain; on a non-XL plan the Sonnet pre-flights (`docs-checker`, `prior-art-checker`, `plan-coverage-checker`) gate before the Opus reviewer; on the accepted-XL lane a `plan-reviewer` pass runs ahead of them, so four Sonnet-tier passes precede the Opus persona. `plan-coverage-checker` has no EM opt-out.

**Angelique (apm) trigger — size-gated, plan-review-only.** Wired into the `full` tier's final stage (`contract/review-roster-fragment.json`), after `code-reviewer`/the Staff Engineer and the Director of Engineering; SIZE-gated on the plan's `sizing_object` (`estimate.tshirt`). Rostered in both `standard` and `full`, so roster membership IS the M-and-above threshold — add no second threshold surface. They never gate: `blocking_verdicts` is `null`, like `coordinator:docs-checker`.

---

## Branch B — Incoming

_A reviewer has returned output, having already applied every finding in place and verified its
own findings ledger. The EM checks whether anything should come back out._

**The double-check is a disagreement scan, not a re-adjudication.** Findings reaching the EM are already applied and ledgered by the reviewer. Read the applied diff and the findings ledger and reject what you disagree with via `review-findings-ledger reject --sidecar <path> --finding <id> --reason "<one line>"` — only the EM may run `reject`.

**Application is not measured by count.** Rejecting a nit you disagree with is a correct outcome.
The reviewer applies everything under an `OK`/`WARN`/`BLOCKED` verdict; under `REJECTED`/`PIVOT`
(premise failure) or a Kira `rebuild_recommended: true`, it applies nothing and logs every row
`suspended`.

**Forbidden:** defer-to-later, capture-for-backlog, time-estimate-as-rationale — surface to PM; the EM does not decide to defer. Rejecting a disagreeable finding is a disposition, and needs a `reject` reason.

**Provenance gate — resolve before triage.** Reviewer (persona/`code-reviewer`) sidecar at
`state/subagent-share/<session>/<key>.md`? → the ledger contract above applies. Pre-flight lens
checker (`prior-art-checker`, `plan-coverage-checker`, `docs-checker`, `external-pattern-checker`)
sidecar at `.coordinator-local/plan-sidecars/<plan-stem>.<lens>.md`? → dispatch `coordinator:enricher`
with the lens sidecar path + adjudicated items instead; a pre-flight lens sidecar is never a
findings-ledger sidecar. Never hand-author around this.

**An artifact-shape tradeoff** (architectural direction, scope, sequencing, file organization,
abstraction boundary) the reviewer applied anyway is exactly the case the EM's double-check exists
for: read the reasoning, and `reject` it with a reason if the EM disagrees with the direction.
YAGNI/scope-trim, refactor-over-patch, and build-vs-defer stay PM calls when the finding itself
raises one — the reviewer applying the edit does not resolve who owns that call.

**Worker Dispatch Recommendations block present** → dispatch each named worker (reviewers name,
EM dispatches), feed output back into EM context. Surface-specific eligibility and the
test-evidence-parser capture-before-dispatch rule are assembled by the op.

**Rejecting a finding from a plan body invalidates its mise-prep stamp** as applying one did: `mise_prepped_sha` is `canonical_body_sha` of the plan BODY, so any edit makes an existing `mise_prepped_*` attest STALE, not absent. Say STALE and route to a re-gate (`<settings-home>/bin/mise-prep-gate <plan>`), never a re-stamp; the predicate is a recomputed sha, never `mise_prepped_by` presence. Tripwire: `A-PRESENT-MISE-PREPPED-STAMP-IS-NOT-A-CERTIFICATION`; four states, four repairs: `coordinator/docs/wiki/lesson-triage/mise-prepped-attest.md`.

**`/review` fires on exiting `/plan`, not after an announcement.** The EM invokes it in the same
turn, without waiting to be asked.

---

## Cross-reference exit

After Branch B for a multi-reviewer review and Reviewer 1's findings are applied and verified, return to A.2 for Reviewer 2 — this skill is re-entrant.

Execution-authorization gate, stamp-op invocation, and prior-art mutability/reviewer-elevation (plan-only) are assembled by `review-assemble brief`.

`status: reviewed` and the mise-prep attest are orthogonal: `/review` writes `reviewer:` +
`status: reviewed`; nothing here stamps a plan mise-prepped.

After authorization, the EM owns the dispatch-gate graph before the first executor dispatch: enumerate touched files per task, mark file-overlap/output-consumption/contract-change gates only, size per-executor scope ~5-10 min (15 min ceiling), author parallel-wave prompts with explicit peer-scope prohibition. Procedure: `coordinator:execute-plan` Phase 1.5.