omp-flow: Skill for Claude Code

OMP-Flow Check

Required Inputs

Fail closed unless all are available:

• task Bundle root, review role, bounded objective, and work entry Concept;
• explicit Review Concept output path;
• native reviewer actor ID and review dispatch receipt;
• completed implementation predecessor receipt from a different actor;
• work Concept and predecessor-linked handoff, plus any applicable linked design or decisions;
• real implementation diff;

Code layouts (on demand)

Read only for the matching code-review question; resolve the installed path from the project root, not from the Skill directory:

• Adversarial review of bounded implemented code: .omp-flow/workflow/code/interrogate.md.

Review Order

Main/coordinator alone dispatches, correlates receipts, records human calibration, and chooses transitions. A dispatched Reviewer performs only the bounded independent Review and assigned Review Concept; it does not dispatch, govern, calibrate, transition, or reinterpret coordinator clauses. The Reviewer compares actual code and verification with the intended work/Design consequence, and reports evidence contradicting the Design or its principal-problem framing through that output rather than let a handoff or superficial green check substitute for the practice result.

1. Resolve the completed predecessor operation and use its output path as the required handoff. Read the work Concept and handoff, verify they identify each other and that the handoff's stated reading of the assignment matches the Work, then inspect the real diff and changed files read-only (never mutate HEAD, index, or working tree). When reviewing a committed range BASE..HEAD, verify git merge-base --is-ancestor BASE HEAD and non-empty commits before grading.
2. Check scope, end-to-end data flow, and acceptance criteria against the work Concept and approved design. For removed or renamed behavior, verify against the pre-change baseline that old code paths are gone. If the Work or Design itself mandates a defect, flag it explicitly as work/design-mandated for coordinator/human routing rather than waving it through.
3. Inspect correctness, edge cases (spec silence on a plausible input is not permission to crash or corrupt state), error behavior, security, maintainability, and test falsifiability (two imagined edits: fails when behavior breaks, passes when internals change).
4. Verify applicable linked decisions, interfaces, and source constraints. Separate the required invariant violated from any non-binding example fix hint.
5. Do not re-run heavy full test suites that the handoff already ran with fresh recorded output; run independent focused checks for specific doubts, unverified claims, or shared contracts. Distinguish Not applicable from Unverified (missing evidence).
6. Write the Review Concept at the supplied output path, link it to the work and handoff, lead with severity-ordered findings, give every finding all applicable HARD_BLOCKER, PRINCIPAL_BLOCKER, WORK_FAIL, and ADVISORY labels, record exact commands/results, and list cleared risks plus any disproven false-positive leads with file:line evidence.