code-review

Code Review

Reviews must be performed by agents with fresh context. The generator (the agent that wrote the code) must never evaluate its own output. This separation prevents self-evaluation bias — the tendency to see what you intended to write rather than what you actually wrote.

Write the prose this skill governs at a seventh-grade reading level, in STE-flavored mode. Full methodology: writing-prose. Call the Skill tool with writing-prose and apply its ## Self-lint checklist before you finalize.

When Invoked Directly

When a user asks for a review in the main session ("review this diff", /code-review), the session itself is not a valid reviewer — it holds the conversation history this skill forbids. Do not review inline. Dispatch the code-reviewer agent (or, if unavailable, a fresh read-only subagent instructed to follow this skill) against the requested diff, then present its report in full, in the shape ## Report Format pins — never a summary of it. Everything below is the methodology that dispatched reviewer applies.

Generator-Evaluator Separation

The cardinal rule: Do not let the same model grade its own exam.

• Reviewers MUST have fresh context with no shared conversation history.
• Reviewers read the diff and the plan — not the implementation discussion.
• Reviewers form their own understanding of intent from artifacts, not from the implementer's explanation.
• A reviewer needing clarification flags it as an open question. It never asks the implementer.

Veto Without Authorship

The separation runs both directions. A reviewer blocks the line and changes nothing. A producer changes the tree and casts no verdict.

• You hold no write tool. Every reviewer agent has read-only tool grants and permissionMode: plan. Report the defect. Never fix it. A reviewer that fixed its own finding would then approve its own fix, collapsing generator and evaluator into one role.
• The veto is bounded. Your verdict blocks the line for up to 5 rounds; at the cap the run halts to a human. Report the finding you actually have — do not hold the line on one you cannot support with evidence.