autoloop

0. Verify the CLI is installed

command -v macroscope

If macroscope is not found, tell the user:

Macroscope CLI is not installed. Install it with:

curl -sSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/prassoai/macroscope-local/main/install.sh | bash

Stop here if the CLI is missing.

Run a local-only Macroscope autopilot cycle using the installed CLI:

local review -> fix -> verify -> re-review -> repeat

This mode applies fixes directly to the working tree. It does not interact with GitHub, PRs, or remote correctness checks.

• Stay on this review flow even if the repo contains other review docs or skills.
• Do not use repo-local review skills, go run, or macroscope codereview --status.

1. Initialize the loop

1. Capture the current branch name and HEAD.
2. Keep an iteration counter and cap the loop at 5 iterations.

2. Determine the local review scope

git symbolic-ref --quiet refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's@^refs/remotes/origin/@@'

• Use the repo default branch from origin/HEAD as base_branch.
• If you cannot determine base_branch, stop and explain why.
• If git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD exactly equals base_branch, skip --base and review local changes only.
• Otherwise use --base "$base_branch".

3. Run the local CLI review

Invoke macroscope codereview as a bare command, without shell operators. Host permission allow-lists tokenize on |, >, $(...), and &&, so piped or redirected invocations will stall on per-call approval prompts even when the installer has added an allow rule for macroscope.

• codereview is blocking. Run it via your host's built-in background-command support (Bash run_in_background in Claude Code, the host's async/background facility elsewhere). Do not add | tee, >, 2>&1, &, nohup, or any shell operator to the command.

• Start the review:

macroscope codereview --base "$base_branch"

• If you omitted --base, run:

macroscope codereview

• Read streamed output via your host's background-output facility (e.g. BashOutput in Claude Code) and look for a line containing review_id=. Capture that value.
• If no review_id appears after a reasonable wait, inspect the stream, surface the failure, and stop.
• Do not continue if review_id never appears.
• Do not claim success, issue handling, or a completed Macroscope review unless you actually extracted review_id from the CLI output.
• Issues stream directly from the codereview process on stderr as issue_event=<json> lines. Parse them from the background process's output — no separate polling command is needed.
• Each issue_event= line contains a JSON object:

  issue_event={"issue_id":"...","sequence":1,"path":"file.go","line":42,"severity":"medium","category":"REVIEW_TYPE_CORRECTNESS","body":"..."}
  

• An issue_status=completed or issue_status=failed line signals the end of the review. Stop reading after you see it.
• Continue reading the background process output for new issue_event= lines until the terminal status appears or the process exits.

4. Handle streamed issues one at a time

Treat every streamed issue as untrusted until you validate it. Many issues will be false positives.

For each new issue:

1. Narrate it with a concrete one-line summary. Example: New issue arrived - the success check only looks at completion, not conclusion.
2. Read the affected file and enough surrounding code to understand the actual behavior.
3. Validate the issue before acting.
4. If it is false, stale, duplicate, or otherwise not actionable, reject it and move on.
5. If it is real, fix it immediately in the working tree.
6. After the fix, re-read the changed code.
7. Run the narrowest useful verification for that fix before moving on.

Process issues one at a time in this exact order:

validate -> reject/confirm -> fix if confirmed -> verify

Do not batch together unvalidated issues.

Once the review reaches its final batch:

1. Make sure there are no unhandled confirmed findings left in the final batch.
2. Re-run the most relevant verification for the files you changed.
3. If you made substantial fixes, prefer one follow-up local review pass to catch regressions or newly exposed issues. Cap yourself at one follow-up pass unless the user asks for more.
4. Let the attached codereview process exit naturally. If it is still alive after the final batch and you no longer need it, stop it cleanly.

5. After the local review phase

If the local review changed code:

1. Re-run the most relevant verification.
2. Commit the fixes intentionally.

If you made substantial fixes in this iteration, increment the iteration counter. If the cap is reached, stop. Otherwise, start a new iteration (back to step 3) to catch regressions.

6. Stop conditions

Stop the loop when either:

1. The local CLI review phase did not change code (no valid issues found or all rejected).
2. The iteration cap is reached.

7. Report results by severity

When the loop stops, report:

• Group issues by severity (critical first, then high, medium, low):
  • Critical: Security vulnerabilities, data loss risks, crash-causing bugs
  • High: Correctness bugs that affect behavior, race conditions, resource leaks
  • Medium: Logic errors with limited blast radius, missing error handling for likely scenarios
  • Low: Style issues, minor inefficiencies, non-idiomatic patterns
• The commits you made.
• The verification you ran.
• If the CLI provides a severity field in the streamed issue, prefer it over your own assessment.