mirror of
https://github.com/catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow.git
synced 2026-02-15 02:42:45 +08:00
feat: Add Phase 6 for Post-Implementation Review and enhance workflow execution
- Introduced Phase 6: Post-Implementation Review with detailed steps for specialized reviews (quality, security, architecture, action items). - Updated SKILL.md to reflect new phase and its execution lifecycle. - Enhanced Flowchart component to conditionally display step statuses based on task tracking. - Modified TaskDrawer to pass status tracking prop to Flowchart. - Improved AgentList and other terminal dashboard components for better UI consistency and responsiveness. - Removed GlobalKpiBar component as part of UI cleanup. - Added issue detail preview in TerminalWorkbench for better user experience when no terminal is active. - Updated localization files for new strings related to the terminal dashboard and workbench. - Enhanced TaskListTab to conditionally render task stats and status dropdown based on task status tracking.
This commit is contained in:
catlog22
@@ -1,322 +0,0 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: review
|
||||
description: Post-implementation review with specialized types (security/architecture/action-items/quality) using analysis agents and Gemini
|
||||
argument-hint: "[--type=security|architecture|action-items|quality] [--archived] [optional: session-id]"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Command Overview: /workflow:review
|
||||
|
||||
**Optional specialized review** for completed implementations. In the standard workflow, **passing tests = approved code**. Use this command only when specialized review is required (security, architecture, compliance, docs).
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy: "Tests Are the Review"
|
||||
|
||||
- **Default**: All tests pass -> Code approved
|
||||
- **Optional**: Specialized reviews for:
|
||||
- Security audits (vulnerabilities, auth/authz)
|
||||
- Architecture compliance (patterns, technical debt)
|
||||
- Action items verification (requirements met, acceptance criteria)
|
||||
|
||||
## Review Types
|
||||
|
||||
| Type | Focus | Use Case |
|
||||
|------|-------|----------|
|
||||
| `quality` | Code quality, best practices, maintainability | Default general review |
|
||||
| `security` | Security vulnerabilities, data handling, access control | Security audits |
|
||||
| `architecture` | Architectural patterns, technical debt, design decisions | Architecture compliance |
|
||||
| `action-items` | Requirements met, acceptance criteria verified, action items completed | Pre-deployment verification |
|
||||
|
||||
**Notes**:
|
||||
- For documentation generation, use `/workflow:tools:docs`
|
||||
- For CLAUDE.md updates, use `/update-memory-related`
|
||||
|
||||
## Execution Process
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Input Parsing:
|
||||
├─ Parse --type flag (default: quality)
|
||||
├─ Parse --archived flag (search in archives)
|
||||
└─ Parse session-id argument (optional)
|
||||
|
||||
Step 1: Session Resolution
|
||||
└─ Decision:
|
||||
├─ session-id provided + --archived → Search .workflow/archives/
|
||||
├─ session-id provided → Search .workflow/active/ first, then archives
|
||||
└─ Not provided → Auto-detect from .workflow/active/
|
||||
|
||||
Step 2: Validation
|
||||
├─ Check session directory exists (active or archived)
|
||||
└─ Check for completed implementation (.summaries/IMPL-*.md exists)
|
||||
|
||||
Step 3: Type Check
|
||||
└─ Decision:
|
||||
├─ type=docs → Redirect to /workflow:tools:docs
|
||||
└─ Other types → Continue to analysis
|
||||
|
||||
Step 4: Model Analysis Phase
|
||||
├─ Load context (summaries, test results, changed files)
|
||||
└─ Perform specialized review by type:
|
||||
├─ security → Security patterns + Gemini analysis
|
||||
├─ architecture → Qwen architecture analysis
|
||||
├─ quality → Gemini code quality analysis
|
||||
└─ action-items → Requirements verification
|
||||
|
||||
Step 5: Generate Report
|
||||
└─ Output: REVIEW-{type}.md
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Execution Template
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
#!/bin/bash
|
||||
# Optional specialized review for completed implementation
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 1: Session ID resolution and location detection
|
||||
if [ -n "$SESSION_ARG" ]; then
|
||||
sessionId="$SESSION_ARG"
|
||||
else
|
||||
sessionId=$(find .workflow/active/ -name "WFS-*" -type d | head -1 | xargs basename)
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 2: Resolve session path (active or archived)
|
||||
# Priority: --archived flag → active → archives
|
||||
if [ -n "$ARCHIVED_FLAG" ]; then
|
||||
sessionPath=".workflow/archives/${sessionId}"
|
||||
elif [ -d ".workflow/active/${sessionId}" ]; then
|
||||
sessionPath=".workflow/active/${sessionId}"
|
||||
elif [ -d ".workflow/archives/${sessionId}" ]; then
|
||||
sessionPath=".workflow/archives/${sessionId}"
|
||||
echo "Note: Session found in archives, running review on archived session"
|
||||
else
|
||||
echo "Session ${sessionId} not found in active or archives"
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Check for completed tasks
|
||||
if [ ! -d "${sessionPath}/.summaries" ] || [ -z "$(find ${sessionPath}/.summaries/ -name "IMPL-*.md" -type f 2>/dev/null)" ]; then
|
||||
echo "No completed implementation found. Complete implementation first"
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 3: Determine review type (default: quality)
|
||||
review_type="${TYPE_ARG:-quality}"
|
||||
|
||||
# Redirect docs review to specialized command
|
||||
if [ "$review_type" = "docs" ]; then
|
||||
echo "For documentation generation, please use:"
|
||||
echo " /workflow:tools:docs"
|
||||
echo ""
|
||||
echo "The docs command provides:"
|
||||
echo " - Hierarchical architecture documentation"
|
||||
echo " - API documentation generation"
|
||||
echo " - Documentation structure analysis"
|
||||
exit 0
|
||||
fi
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 4: Analysis handover → Model takes control
|
||||
# BASH_EXECUTION_STOPS → MODEL_ANALYSIS_BEGINS
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Model Analysis Phase
|
||||
|
||||
After bash validation, the model takes control to:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Load Context**: Read completed task summaries and changed files
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Load implementation summaries (iterate through .summaries/ directory)
|
||||
for summary in ${sessionPath}/.summaries/*.md; do
|
||||
cat "$summary"
|
||||
done
|
||||
|
||||
# Load test results (if available)
|
||||
for test_summary in ${sessionPath}/.summaries/TEST-FIX-*.md 2>/dev/null; do
|
||||
cat "$test_summary"
|
||||
done
|
||||
|
||||
# Get changed files
|
||||
git log --since="$(cat ${sessionPath}/workflow-session.json | jq -r .created_at)" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Perform Specialized Review**: Based on `review_type`
|
||||
|
||||
**Security Review** (`--type=security`):
|
||||
- Use ripgrep for security patterns:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
rg "password|token|secret|auth" -g "*.{ts,js,py}"
|
||||
rg "eval|exec|innerHTML|dangerouslySetInnerHTML" -g "*.{ts,js,tsx}"
|
||||
```
|
||||
- Use Gemini for security analysis:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
ccw cli -p "
|
||||
PURPOSE: Security audit of completed implementation
|
||||
TASK: Review code for security vulnerabilities, insecure patterns, auth/authz issues
|
||||
CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
|
||||
EXPECTED: Security findings report with severity levels
|
||||
RULES: Focus on OWASP Top 10, authentication, authorization, data validation, injection risks
|
||||
" --tool gemini --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Architecture Review** (`--type=architecture`):
|
||||
- Use Qwen for architecture analysis:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
ccw cli -p "
|
||||
PURPOSE: Architecture compliance review
|
||||
TASK: Evaluate adherence to architectural patterns, identify technical debt, review design decisions
|
||||
CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
|
||||
EXPECTED: Architecture assessment with recommendations
|
||||
RULES: Check for patterns, separation of concerns, modularity, scalability
|
||||
" --tool qwen --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Review** (`--type=quality`):
|
||||
- Use Gemini for code quality:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
ccw cli -p "
|
||||
PURPOSE: Code quality and best practices review
|
||||
TASK: Assess code readability, maintainability, adherence to best practices
|
||||
CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
|
||||
EXPECTED: Quality assessment with improvement suggestions
|
||||
RULES: Check for code smells, duplication, complexity, naming conventions
|
||||
" --tool gemini --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Action Items Review** (`--type=action-items`):
|
||||
- Verify all requirements and acceptance criteria met:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Load task requirements and acceptance criteria
|
||||
for task_file in ${sessionPath}/.task/*.json; do
|
||||
cat "$task_file" | jq -r '
|
||||
"Task: " + .id + "\n" +
|
||||
"Requirements: " + .description + "\n" +
|
||||
"Acceptance: " + (.convergence.criteria | join(", "))
|
||||
'
|
||||
done
|
||||
|
||||
# Check implementation summaries against requirements
|
||||
ccw cli -p "
|
||||
PURPOSE: Verify all requirements and acceptance criteria are met
|
||||
TASK: Cross-check implementation summaries against original requirements
|
||||
CONTEXT: @.task/IMPL-*.json,.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
|
||||
EXPECTED:
|
||||
- Requirements coverage matrix
|
||||
- Acceptance criteria verification
|
||||
- Missing/incomplete action items
|
||||
- Pre-deployment readiness assessment
|
||||
RULES:
|
||||
- Check each requirement has corresponding implementation
|
||||
- Verify all acceptance criteria are met
|
||||
- Flag any incomplete or missing action items
|
||||
- Assess deployment readiness
|
||||
" --tool gemini --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Generate Review Report**: Create structured report
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# Review Report: ${review_type}
|
||||
|
||||
**Session**: ${sessionId}
|
||||
**Date**: $(date)
|
||||
**Type**: ${review_type}
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
- Tasks Reviewed: [count IMPL tasks]
|
||||
- Files Changed: [count files]
|
||||
- Severity: [High/Medium/Low]
|
||||
|
||||
## Findings
|
||||
|
||||
### Critical Issues
|
||||
- [Issue 1 with file:line reference]
|
||||
- [Issue 2 with file:line reference]
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendations
|
||||
- [Recommendation 1]
|
||||
- [Recommendation 2]
|
||||
|
||||
### Positive Observations
|
||||
- [Good pattern observed]
|
||||
|
||||
## Action Items
|
||||
- [ ] [Action 1]
|
||||
- [ ] [Action 2]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Output Files**:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Save review report
|
||||
Write(${sessionPath}/REVIEW-${review_type}.md)
|
||||
|
||||
# Update session metadata
|
||||
# (optional) Update workflow-session.json with review status
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Optional: Update Memory** (if docs review or significant findings):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# If architecture or quality issues found, suggest memory update
|
||||
if [ "$review_type" = "architecture" ] || [ "$review_type" = "quality" ]; then
|
||||
echo "Consider updating project documentation:"
|
||||
echo " /update-memory-related"
|
||||
fi
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Usage Examples
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# General quality review after implementation
|
||||
/workflow:review
|
||||
|
||||
# Security audit before deployment
|
||||
/workflow:review --type=security
|
||||
|
||||
# Architecture review for specific session
|
||||
/workflow:review --type=architecture WFS-payment-integration
|
||||
|
||||
# Review an archived session (auto-detects if not in active)
|
||||
/workflow:review --type=security WFS-old-feature
|
||||
|
||||
# Explicitly review archived session
|
||||
/workflow:review --archived --type=quality WFS-completed-feature
|
||||
|
||||
# Documentation review
|
||||
/workflow:review --type=docs
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Features
|
||||
|
||||
- **Simple Validation**: Check session exists and has completed tasks
|
||||
- **No Complex Orchestration**: Direct analysis, no multi-phase pipeline
|
||||
- **Specialized Reviews**: Different prompts and tools for different review types
|
||||
- **Archived Session Support**: Review archived sessions with `--archived` flag or auto-detection
|
||||
- **MCP Integration**: Fast code search for security and architecture patterns
|
||||
- **CLI Tool Integration**: Gemini for analysis, Qwen for architecture
|
||||
- **Structured Output**: Markdown reports with severity levels and action items
|
||||
- **Optional Memory Update**: Suggests documentation updates for significant findings
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration with Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Standard Workflow:
|
||||
plan -> execute -> test-gen -> execute (complete)
|
||||
|
||||
Optional Review (when needed):
|
||||
plan -> execute -> test-gen -> execute -> review (security/architecture/docs)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use**:
|
||||
- Before production deployment (security review + action-items review)
|
||||
- After major feature (architecture review)
|
||||
- Before code freeze (quality review)
|
||||
- Pre-deployment verification (action-items review)
|
||||
|
||||
**When NOT to Use**:
|
||||
- Regular development (tests are sufficient)
|
||||
- Simple bug fixes (test-fix-agent handles it)
|
||||
- Minor changes (update-memory-related is enough)
|
||||
|
||||
## Post-Review Action
|
||||
|
||||
After review completion, prompt user:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Review complete. Would you like to complete and archive this session?
|
||||
→ Run /workflow:session:complete to archive with lessons learned
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -116,14 +116,21 @@ Phase 5: Completion
|
||||
├─ Update task statuses in JSON files
|
||||
├─ Generate summaries
|
||||
└─ AskUserQuestion: Choose next step
|
||||
├─ "Enter Review" → /workflow:review
|
||||
├─ "Enter Review" → Phase 6
|
||||
└─ "Complete Session" → /workflow:session:complete
|
||||
|
||||
Phase 6: Post-Implementation Review (Optional)
|
||||
└─ Ref: phases/06-review.md
|
||||
├─ Select review type (quality/security/architecture/action-items)
|
||||
├─ CLI-assisted analysis (Gemini/Qwen)
|
||||
├─ Generate REVIEW-{type}.md report
|
||||
└─ Post-review: another review or complete session
|
||||
|
||||
Resume Mode (--resume-session):
|
||||
├─ Skip Phase 1 & Phase 2
|
||||
└─ Entry Point: Phase 3 (TodoWrite Generation)
|
||||
├─ Update session status to "active" (if not already)
|
||||
└─ Continue: Phase 4 → Phase 5
|
||||
└─ Continue: Phase 4 → Phase 5 → [Phase 6]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Execution Lifecycle
|
||||
@@ -346,7 +353,7 @@ if (autoYes) {
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Based on user selection**:
|
||||
- **"Enter Review"**: Execute `/workflow:review`
|
||||
- **"Enter Review"**: Execute Phase 6 → `Ref: phases/06-review.md`
|
||||
- **"Complete Session"**: Execute `/workflow:session:complete`
|
||||
|
||||
### Post-Completion Expansion
|
||||
@@ -532,6 +539,12 @@ meta.agent missing → Infer from meta.type:
|
||||
- "docs" → @doc-generator
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase Reference Documents
|
||||
|
||||
| Phase | Document | Purpose |
|
||||
|-------|----------|---------|
|
||||
| 6 | [phases/06-review.md](phases/06-review.md) | Post-implementation specialized review (security/architecture/quality/action-items) |
|
||||
|
||||
## Workflow File Structure Reference
|
||||
```
|
||||
.workflow/active/WFS-[topic-slug]/
|
||||
|
||||
212
.claude/skills/workflow-execute/phases/06-review.md
Normal file
212
.claude/skills/workflow-execute/phases/06-review.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,212 @@
|
||||
# Phase 6: Post-Implementation Review
|
||||
|
||||
Optional specialized review for completed implementations. In the standard workflow, **passing tests = approved code**. This phase executes only when user selects "Enter Review" in Phase 5 completion.
|
||||
|
||||
## Objective
|
||||
|
||||
- Perform specialized review (security/architecture/quality/action-items) on completed implementation
|
||||
- Generate structured review report with severity levels and action items
|
||||
- Provide CLI-assisted analysis using Gemini/Qwen for deep review
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy: "Tests Are the Review"
|
||||
|
||||
- **Default**: All tests pass → Code approved
|
||||
- **Optional**: This phase for specialized reviews:
|
||||
- Security audits (vulnerabilities, auth/authz)
|
||||
- Architecture compliance (patterns, technical debt)
|
||||
- Action items verification (requirements met, acceptance criteria)
|
||||
- Code quality assessment (best practices, maintainability)
|
||||
|
||||
## Review Types
|
||||
|
||||
| Type | Focus | Use Case |
|
||||
|------|-------|----------|
|
||||
| `quality` | Code quality, best practices, maintainability | Default general review |
|
||||
| `security` | Security vulnerabilities, data handling, access control | Security audits |
|
||||
| `architecture` | Architectural patterns, technical debt, design decisions | Architecture compliance |
|
||||
| `action-items` | Requirements met, acceptance criteria verified | Pre-deployment verification |
|
||||
|
||||
**Notes**:
|
||||
- For documentation generation, use `/workflow:tools:docs`
|
||||
- For CLAUDE.md updates, use `/update-memory-related`
|
||||
|
||||
## Execution
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 6.1: Review Type Selection
|
||||
|
||||
Prompt user to select review type:
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
AskUserQuestion({
|
||||
questions: [{
|
||||
question: "Select review type:",
|
||||
header: "Review Type",
|
||||
multiSelect: false,
|
||||
options: [
|
||||
{ label: "Quality (Recommended)", description: "Code quality, best practices, maintainability" },
|
||||
{ label: "Security", description: "Security vulnerabilities, data handling, access control" },
|
||||
{ label: "Architecture", description: "Architectural patterns, technical debt, design decisions" },
|
||||
{ label: "Action Items", description: "Requirements met, acceptance criteria verified" }
|
||||
]
|
||||
}]
|
||||
})
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Auto Mode** (`--yes`): Skip selection, default to `quality`.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 6.2: Validation
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Verify completed implementation exists
|
||||
sessionPath=".workflow/active/${sessionId}"
|
||||
|
||||
if [ ! -d "${sessionPath}/.summaries" ] || [ -z "$(find ${sessionPath}/.summaries/ -name "IMPL-*.md" -type f 2>/dev/null)" ]; then
|
||||
echo "No completed implementation found. Complete implementation first."
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
fi
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 6.3: Context Loading
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Load implementation summaries
|
||||
for summary in ${sessionPath}/.summaries/*.md; do
|
||||
cat "$summary"
|
||||
done
|
||||
|
||||
# Load test results (if available)
|
||||
for test_summary in ${sessionPath}/.summaries/TEST-FIX-*.md 2>/dev/null; do
|
||||
cat "$test_summary"
|
||||
done
|
||||
|
||||
# Get changed files
|
||||
git log --since="$(cat ${sessionPath}/workflow-session.json | jq -r .created_at)" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 6.4: Specialized Review Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
Based on `review_type`, execute the corresponding analysis:
|
||||
|
||||
**Security Review** (`security`):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Pattern scan
|
||||
rg "password|token|secret|auth" -g "*.{ts,js,py}"
|
||||
rg "eval|exec|innerHTML|dangerouslySetInnerHTML" -g "*.{ts,js,tsx}"
|
||||
|
||||
# Gemini security analysis
|
||||
ccw cli -p "
|
||||
PURPOSE: Security audit of completed implementation
|
||||
TASK: Review code for security vulnerabilities, insecure patterns, auth/authz issues
|
||||
CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
|
||||
EXPECTED: Security findings report with severity levels
|
||||
RULES: Focus on OWASP Top 10, authentication, authorization, data validation, injection risks
|
||||
" --tool gemini --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Architecture Review** (`architecture`):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
ccw cli -p "
|
||||
PURPOSE: Architecture compliance review
|
||||
TASK: Evaluate adherence to architectural patterns, identify technical debt, review design decisions
|
||||
CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
|
||||
EXPECTED: Architecture assessment with recommendations
|
||||
RULES: Check for patterns, separation of concerns, modularity, scalability
|
||||
" --tool qwen --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Quality Review** (`quality`):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
ccw cli -p "
|
||||
PURPOSE: Code quality and best practices review
|
||||
TASK: Assess code readability, maintainability, adherence to best practices
|
||||
CONTEXT: @.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
|
||||
EXPECTED: Quality assessment with improvement suggestions
|
||||
RULES: Check for code smells, duplication, complexity, naming conventions
|
||||
" --tool gemini --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Action Items Review** (`action-items`):
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Load task requirements and acceptance criteria
|
||||
for task_file in ${sessionPath}/.task/*.json; do
|
||||
cat "$task_file" | jq -r '
|
||||
"Task: " + .id + "\n" +
|
||||
"Requirements: " + .description + "\n" +
|
||||
"Acceptance: " + (.convergence.criteria | join(", "))
|
||||
'
|
||||
done
|
||||
|
||||
# Cross-check implementation against requirements
|
||||
ccw cli -p "
|
||||
PURPOSE: Verify all requirements and acceptance criteria are met
|
||||
TASK: Cross-check implementation summaries against original requirements
|
||||
CONTEXT: @.task/IMPL-*.json,.summaries/IMPL-*.md,../.. @../../project-tech.json @../../project-guidelines.json
|
||||
EXPECTED:
|
||||
- Requirements coverage matrix
|
||||
- Acceptance criteria verification
|
||||
- Missing/incomplete action items
|
||||
- Pre-deployment readiness assessment
|
||||
RULES:
|
||||
- Check each requirement has corresponding implementation
|
||||
- Verify all acceptance criteria are met
|
||||
- Flag any incomplete or missing action items
|
||||
- Assess deployment readiness
|
||||
" --tool gemini --mode write --cd ${sessionPath}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 6.5: Generate Review Report
|
||||
|
||||
Write structured report to session directory:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# Review Report: ${review_type}
|
||||
|
||||
**Session**: ${sessionId}
|
||||
**Date**: $(date)
|
||||
**Type**: ${review_type}
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
- Tasks Reviewed: [count IMPL tasks]
|
||||
- Files Changed: [count files]
|
||||
- Severity: [High/Medium/Low]
|
||||
|
||||
## Findings
|
||||
|
||||
### Critical Issues
|
||||
- [Issue 1 with file:line reference]
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommendations
|
||||
- [Recommendation 1]
|
||||
|
||||
### Positive Observations
|
||||
- [Good pattern observed]
|
||||
|
||||
## Action Items
|
||||
- [ ] [Action 1]
|
||||
- [ ] [Action 2]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Output**: `${sessionPath}/REVIEW-${review_type}.md`
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 6.6: Post-Review Prompt
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
Review complete. Would you like to:
|
||||
→ Run another review type
|
||||
→ Complete session: /workflow:session:complete
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If architecture or quality issues found, suggest:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Consider updating project documentation:
|
||||
→ /update-memory-related
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Output
|
||||
|
||||
- **File**: `${sessionPath}/REVIEW-${review_type}.md`
|
||||
- **TodoWrite**: Mark Phase 6 completed
|
||||
|
||||
## Next Phase
|
||||
|
||||
Return to orchestrator for session completion or additional review cycles.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user