By name: review description: Review finished work before reflection and commit. metadata: thinkingLevel: high
Review the active task after implementation and before /reflect.
Review Process
Verify: correctness (does it solve the task?), minimal surface area, no scope creep, no unnecessary abstractions, no one-use wrappers/classes that should be inlined, no broad exception handling or silent fallbacks, no backward compatibility layers unless explicitly requested, no AI bloat.
- Identify the files changed during implementation. Exclude commit-step artifacts (plan archival and
agent-work/features.yamlcompletion updates), but include explicitly planned documentation deliverables. - Read them. Ask whether the same task could have been solved with a simpler, smaller change. Check that the implementation is as narrow as possible — flag duplication, unnecessary abstractions, generalized designs, plan overreach, one-use functions/classes that do not improve clarity, broad
try/except, silent failures, fallback behavior, pattern drift, or edits that widen the impact surface. - Check for residue and file hygiene: debug prints, commented-out code, TODO/FIXME markers from completed work, prompt-generated bloat, temporary test scripts, generated outputs, scratch files, implementation-phase scaffold tests that only lock helper names/prompt substrings/internal structure, and
agent-workartifacts that are not needed for active plans, review, reproduction, evidence, requested decks, or archived history. - For non-trivial changes, invoke the
code-criticreviewer subagent once with the assembled file list. - Fix only clear, high-impact issues. Ignore low-confidence or out-of-scope feedback; re-run only after material changes.
Boundaries
Do not:
- archive plans
- mutate
agent-work/features.yaml - create a commit
- perform broad documentation updates; note reflection candidates instead
Output
Report one of:
READY FOR REFLECT— implementation has passed review; include aSummary:line with 1-2 sentences on the review result before the handoff label, plus any documentation/reflection candidatesREVIEW ISSUES— list the blocking issues and the concrete fixes needed