review

Review

Repo/code changes: run /deslop before commit, push, PR, or merge. Diff review from fixed point to HEAD. Keep Standards and Spec axes separate.

Inputs

If fixed point missing, ask: "Review against what -- branch, commit, or main?"

Use:

• Diff: git diff <fixed>...HEAD
• Commits: git log <fixed>..HEAD --oneline

Gather

Spec source, first found wins: issue refs in commits via docs/agents/issue-tracker.md; user path; PRD/spec under docs/, specs/, .scratch/; none -> Spec axis reports "no spec available".

Standards sources: AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, CONTEXT.md, CONTEXT-MAP.md, scoped CONTEXT.md, docs/adr/, style docs and config (biome, eslint, tsconfig, prettier, .editorconfig).

Parallel review hats

Spawn all review hats in one message before producing findings, matching /grill-me fan-out. Use general-purpose subagents. Main agent orchestrates only: gather sources, fan out, merge, dedupe, final report.

Prefer /swarm under the hood when available: pass fixed point, changed files, sources, full required hat list, subagent prompt contract, and merge contract. If /swarm is unavailable, spawn hat subagents directly. Swarm must not reduce hats, evidence, lane ownership, or final output.

Required hats: ponytail-review-hat, thermo-nuclear-review-hat, resilience-review-hat, regular-review-hat, adversarial-review-hat, visual-review-hat, test-perf-review-hat, security-privacy-triage-hat.

• ponytail-review-hat: run /ponytail-review on every diff before other hats merge findings; output delete/stdlib/native/yagni/shrink opportunities or Lean already. Ship..
• thermo-nuclear-review-hat: run /thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review for release candidates, large PRs, risky refactors, security/privacy/perf/test concerns, or explicit nuclear/cold-audit asks; otherwise SKIPPED with reason.
• resilience-review-hat: run /resilience-review for forms, validation, async/data, mutations, cache, state machines, config, destructive actions, or loading/error/empty states; otherwise SKIPPED with reason.
• regular-review-hat: Standards and Spec pass. Never invoke /review recursively. If no spec, return Spec: no spec available.
• adversarial-review-hat: ask "What could still be wrong if tests pass and implementation matches spec?" Max 3 findings. If no credible risk, return APPROVED.
• visual-review-hat: run /visual-review for UI, copy, forms, routes, reports, CLI/TUI output, or visual behavior; otherwise SKIPPED with reason.
• test-perf-review-hat: check TDD evidence, coverage gaps, flaky/missing tests, slow paths, render/network/bundle risk, and warning-free commands.
• security-privacy-triage-hat: check auth, authorization, tenant boundaries, secrets, unsafe HTML, injection, SSRF, redirects, dependency execution, logging, analytics, PII, export/import; exploitable/privacy findings escalate to Thermo nuclear.

Review priority hierarchy: 1. Ponytail review 2. Thermo nuclear review 3. Resilience review 4. Regular review 5. Adversarial review 6. Visual review 7. Test/perf review. Security/privacy triage feeds this hierarchy.

No silent skips: all hats run at least triage; SKIPPED needs skip_reason, checked files/surfaces, and absent triggers. Never skip due to time, token budget, small diff, prior confidence, or another hat passing. Thermo nuclear is fail-open. Thermo nuclear and Resilience skip only when diff evidence proves no matching risk surface. If unsure, run the review.

PR value gate: always quantify the Major improvement before verdict. Code is liability: if added surface area is not product value, defensive correctness, or test confidence, treat it as low-value until justified. Value score: HIGH|MEDIUM|LOW|NONE. Maintenance/security/resilience/test-only can score HIGH. If no Major improvement reaches MEDIUM, run /steelman internally against "this PR adds meaningful value". If /steelman confirms low-value, gate blocks pending explicit override, split, or stronger value justification.

Subagent prompt contract: include fixed point, changed files, diff command, commits command, exact review type, and sources; require lane ownership, evidence, severity, priority label, required change, and PR-comment-ready text; cap at 400 words; findings must be diff-introduced, user-impacting, actionable.

Each hat emits: { "reviewer": "<name>", "hat": "<ponytail|thermo-nuclear|resilience|regular|adversarial|visual|test-perf|security-privacy>", "status": "APPROVED|FINDINGS|BLOCKED|SKIPPED", "findings": [], "must_answer": [], "skip_reason": "<required when SKIPPED>" }.

Merge contract: wait for all hats; dedupe by file/range + reference; Dedupe across hats by root cause, not wording; preserve Standards and Spec separately; keep highest severity on disagreement; if subagents unavailable, stop unless user accepts degraded solo review.

PR comments

After all hats finish, merge, dedupe, and verify priority before posting or printing review comments. Do not comment during individual hats. If the target is a GitHub PR and PR comment tooling is available, post inline PR comments automatically to the open or targeted PR; the user does not need to ask. Resolve target in order: explicit PR URL/number, PR targeted by the skill invocation, then the open PR for the current branch. If PR comment tooling is unavailable, no PR exists, or multiple PRs are ambiguous, emit comment-ready output instead. Do not dump the whole review into the PR. Comment only distinct, high-confidence, actionable findings with tight file/line evidence. Prefer P0/P1 comments; include P2 only when the fix is clear and useful; keep P3 Patch or P3 Future items in the summary unless explicitly worth an inline note. In legacy terms: keep P3 and Future items in the summary. Priority mapping: P0 for Blocker, P1 for Major, P2 for Minor, P3 for Patch or Future. Legacy aliases normalize to this scale: P0 bug/blocker, P1 major, P2 minor, P3 patch, Future follow-up. Every posted/comment-ready item must include exactly one priority label. P0/P1 block merge; P2 fix or track; P3 optional polish or later cleanup. Every confirmed bug is P0 or P1. If a bug is diagnosed and reproduced, it must be posted inline with the matching P0/P1 priority; do not demote bugs to P2/P3 because the fix is small. P0 = merge-blocking crash, data loss, security/privacy exposure, corrupt state, outage, impossible core flow, or entirely missing required behavior. P1 = normal-user defect, regression, broken contract/spec, fake success, major accessibility failure, or high-risk edge. Place each PR comment on the tightest changed file/range that introduces the issue. Prefer the exact changed line; if the exact line is not in the diff, use the nearest changed line with context. If no accurate inline location exists, use a top-level PR comment-ready item and explain why inline placement is unsafe. Comment template: What, Why, Suggested fix, One-shot prompt. Prefix every comment with Priority. Keep each comment short. One-shot prompt must be one sentence when simple and name repo/branch, file/range, exact requested change, and verify command when safe; otherwise say why no safe one-shot exists.

Standards

Read standards + diff. Report documented violations only. Cite file + rule. Separate hard violations from judgment calls. Skip what tooling enforces. Max 400 words.

Spec

Read spec + diff. Report missing/partial requirements, scope creep, wrong behavior. Quote spec line for each finding. Max 400 words. Skip if no spec.

Local review routing

Each hat checks its gate: UI/copy/forms/routes/reports/CLI/TUI/visual -> /visual-review; forms/validation/async/data/mutations/cache/state/config/destructive/error/loading/empty -> /resilience-review; auth/permissions/tenant/secrets/HTML/parsing/network/file/deps/logging/privacy -> security/privacy triage; assumptions/abuse/bypass/rollback/surprise/spec holes -> adversarial; behavior/tests/perf/bundle/runtime/render/network -> test/perf; release candidate/large PR/risky refactor/security/privacy/perf/test concern -> /thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review.

Do not recursively invoke /review from a local gate already running inside /review. Do not duplicate local gate reports. Link or summarize verdicts.

Output

See REFERENCE.md for detailed report schema and examples.

## Review
Fixed point: <fixed>
Diff: `git diff <fixed>...HEAD`
Subagents: ponytail-review-hat: <status> | thermo-nuclear-review-hat: <status/skipped: reason> | resilience-review-hat: <status/skipped: reason> | regular-review-hat: <status> | adversarial-review-hat: <status> | visual-review-hat: <status/skipped: reason> | test-perf-review-hat: <status/skipped: reason> | security-privacy-triage-hat: <status/skipped: reason>
## Standards: <findings or pass>
## Spec: <findings, pass, or no spec available>
## Local review gates: Ponytail review: pass|findings; <per-hat pass|findings|skipped>
## PR value gate:
Major improvement: <quantified claim, beneficiary, evidence, delta>
Value score: HIGH|MEDIUM|LOW|NONE
Steelman: not needed | ran: <confirmed value | mixed | low-value>
Gate: pass | low-value | blocked pending override
## Summary: What's working: <1-3 bullets>; Needs attention: <P0/P1/P2 counts>; Follow-ups: <P3 Patch/Future items, skipped lanes, evidence gaps>
## PR comments:
Posted: <count> | Comment-ready fallback: <count> | Skipped as summary-only: <count>
- [P0 Blocker|P1 Major|P2 Minor|P3 Patch|P3 Future] <file:line> <title> -- <posted|comment-ready|summary-only>

Rules: keep Standards and Spec separate. Findings need evidence. No vague praise.