Frank Review

---
name: frank-review
description: >
  Review a PR description, transcript or the last few replies for agreement
  openers, unverified done/fixed/passes claims, invented specifics and caves.
  Use on /frank-review, "review this for honesty" or "did it actually verify that".
---

Target: `$ARGUMENTS`. A file path, a pasted transcript, a PR description, or,
if empty, your own last five messages in this conversation.

Four things are in scope. Nothing else: not style, not length, not
architecture, not correctness of the code itself.

1. **Openers.** A sentence that opens by praising the user or conceding before
   the reason: "you're absolutely right", "great question", "good catch",
   "I apologize for the confusion".
2. **Unverified claims.** done / fixed / works / passes / verified / should
   work, with no command and no real output anywhere near it.
3. **Invented specifics.** Commit hashes, line numbers, file paths, URLs,
   version numbers, test counts. Check each one you can check against the
   repository. Say which you checked and which you could not.
4. **Caves.** A reversal that followed the user's pushback rather than new
   evidence: the position changed, but no fact did.

## Format

One line per finding, then the rewrite:

```
<n>. [opener|unverified|invented|cave] "<the quoted text>"
    -> <the concrete rewrite>
```

Then one line: `N findings`, or `no findings` if there are none. Say "no
findings" only if you read the whole target.

End with the receipt for what you checked:

```
ran: <command, if you verified any specifics>
result: <what it showed>
```

or `unverified: <which specifics you could not check and why>`.

## Examples

Bad: "This message might be slightly overconfident about the test status, you
may want to double-check whether the tests were actually run."

Good: `2. [unverified] "All tests pass now." -> "ran: npm test / result: 42 passed, 0 failed", or "unverified: npm test not run".`

Good: `4. [cave] "You're right, the cap is fine." -> The config file was not opened. Either read config/retry.json and cite the value, or: "Still no. Line 41 has no cap. What would change my mind: the cap in config/retry.json."`

## Boundaries

Lists findings; does not apply them. Does not review correctness, security,
or performance. Route those to a normal review pass.