ms-review

---

description: PitWay: Role-based milestone review workflow (start/brief/record/report/decide) argument-hint: <start|brief|record|report|decide>

milestone-review

Role: Orchestrator (start, brief, record, report) · Main Agent (decide)

pitway milestone-review start <id> [--roles <csv>] [--json]
pitway milestone-review brief <id> --role <role> [--json]
pitway milestone-review record <id> --role <role> --file <path> [--usage <json>] [--json]
pitway milestone-review report <id> [--json]
pitway milestone-review decide <id> --outcome accepted|revision_requested|rejected [--note <text>] [--json]

A role-based review workflow: PitWay manages review state (sessions, briefs, findings, decisions) — the driver runs the actual reviews. Usable against a draft, confirmed, in_progress, or review milestone; never against a completed or cancelled one.

Five steps, always in this order:

• Select roles with the developer. milestone-review start <id> --roles <csv> opens a session (or, with --roles omitted on a TTY, presents a numbered multi-select). Multi-select is the developer's choice — offer a combination that fits the milestone, but never impose one. Three example combinations, quoted as examples, never enforced presets:
  • Architecture/execution milestone → developer,architect,devops
  • Product/UX milestone → developer,product,user
  • Business-impacting milestone → developer,architect,business
• Dispatch one reviewer subagent per selected role. For each role, run milestone-review brief <id> --role <role> --json and pass ONLY that envelope to the dispatched reviewer — the same bounded-context discipline as a task dispatch's own bundle (../dispatch.md). A reviewer subagent runs unconfined (no worktree, no guard) and must never be asked to run pitway itself, edit the contract/tasks, or confirm anything — findings only.
• Record each reviewer's findings verbatim. milestone-review record <id> --role <role> --file <yaml> accepts the brief's own findings YAML shape. Normalizing a reviewer's raw output into that shape is fine; inventing or embellishing a finding the reviewer didn't actually report is not. MUST: when the dispatched reviewer subagent's own tool result reports runtime usage, extract it and pass it as --usage '{"total_tokens": N, ...}' on this same call — the same propagation rule as a task dispatch's own completion (dispatch.md); never estimated or derived, and omitting --usage when none was reported correctly leaves that role's recorded usage null.
• Present the report to the developer. milestone-review report <id> renders every recorded role's findings (severity-ordered), pending roles, and mechanically grouped conflicts/overlaps — read this to the developer, don't reconcile it yourself.
• The developer decides. milestone-review decide <id> --outcome accepted | revision_requested | rejected [--note <text>] closes the session. accepted/revision_requested require every selected role recorded; rejected is the explicit path to abandon an unfinished or stale review. A revision_requested outcome names the two sanctioned revision paths (milestone-add --replace for a draft, milestone-confirm --amend for a confirmed milestone) — apply one, then reconcile the contract yourself; no review command ever writes contract.md or tasks.yaml.

Staleness: a session pins a content hash at start. If the milestone's contract/task content is revised mid-review (a real task-amend/--replace/--amend — never a task transition or milestone-confirm's own status promotion), brief/record refuse on the stale session; decide --outcome rejected abandons it, then start a fresh session.

Honesty: PitWay never runs a review, spawns a reviewer, or verifies reviewer independence — it only enforces the state machine above. A recorded finding is reviewer opinion-evidence, never proof that requires implementation or runtime verification; reconciling findings is always yours, never Core's. Decide before milestone-complete — a decided session keeps the review record readable against what actually shipped.