interrogate

Interrogate

Spawn one reviewer per configured model to adversarially review code changes. Each model gets the same prompt and rubric. The adversarial signal comes from model diversity, not assigned personas. Models differ in blind spots, priors, and reasoning patterns. Agreement across models is high-confidence signal; lone-model findings are worth reading but lower confidence.

The deliverable is a synthesized verdict. Do NOT auto-apply changes.

Dispatch contract. Read provider-dispatch.md before launching reviewers. Configured entries are provider-qualified descriptors; the parent starts native and external read-only lanes directly. On Codex, resolve remaining Claude tool names via codex-tools.md.

Step 1, Determine Scope

Identify what to review from context:

• If the user points at specific files or a diff, use that
• If on a feature branch, run git diff main...HEAD (or the appropriate base branch) for the full changeset
• If the user's message references recent work, gather the relevant files

Package the diff (or file contents) plus any surrounding context files the reviewers need to understand the code.

Step 2, State the Intent

Before spawning reviewers, state the intent explicitly. What is this code trying to accomplish? Derive this from:

• The user's message
• Commit messages
• PR description if one exists
• The code itself

Write one clear paragraph. Reviewers challenge whether the work achieves the intent well, not whether the intent itself is correct. If you're unsure about the intent, ask the user before proceeding.

Step 3, Spawn Reviewers

Start all reviewers in one fan-out phase. Use interrogate reviewers from the current harness's pstack model sheet when present, one reviewer per entry, extending or shrinking the Reviewer A/B/C/D labels below to the configured entry count; otherwise use the table defaults. Native reviewers use the parent subagent primitive. External reviewers use the launcher directly and must return a complete, model-verified receipt.