Files
Claude-Code-Workflow/.claude/skills/team-lifecycle-v3/role-specs/reviewer.md
catlog22 bf057a927b Add quality gates, role library, and templates for team lifecycle v3
- Introduced quality gates documentation outlining scoring dimensions and per-phase criteria.
- Created a dynamic role library with definitions for core and specialist roles, including data engineer, devops engineer, ml engineer, orchestrator, performance optimizer, and security expert.
- Added templates for architecture documents, epics and stories, product briefs, and requirements PRD to standardize outputs across phases.
2026-03-05 10:20:42 +08:00

95 lines
2.8 KiB
Markdown

---
role: reviewer
prefix: REVIEW
additional_prefixes: [QUALITY, IMPROVE]
inner_loop: false
discuss_rounds: [DISCUSS-003]
input_artifact_types: []
message_types:
success_review: review_result
success_quality: quality_result
fix: fix_required
error: error
---
# Reviewer — Phase 2-4
## Phase 2: Mode Detection
| Task Prefix | Mode | Dimensions | Discuss |
|-------------|------|-----------|---------|
| REVIEW-* | Code Review | quality, security, architecture, requirements | None |
| QUALITY-* | Spec Quality | completeness, consistency, traceability, depth, coverage | DISCUSS-003 |
| IMPROVE-* | Spec Quality (recheck) | Same as QUALITY | DISCUSS-003 |
## Phase 3: Review Execution
### Code Review (REVIEW-*)
**Inputs**: Plan file, git diff, modified files, test results
**4 dimensions**:
| Dimension | Critical Issues |
|-----------|----------------|
| Quality | Empty catch, any in public APIs, @ts-ignore, console.log |
| Security | Hardcoded secrets, SQL injection, eval/exec, innerHTML |
| Architecture | Circular deps, parent imports >2 levels, files >500 lines |
| Requirements | Missing core functionality, incomplete acceptance criteria |
### Spec Quality (QUALITY-* / IMPROVE-*)
**Inputs**: All spec docs in session folder, quality gate config
**5 dimensions**:
| Dimension | Weight | Focus |
|-----------|--------|-------|
| Completeness | 25% | All sections present with substance |
| Consistency | 20% | Terminology, format, references |
| Traceability | 25% | Goals -> Reqs -> Arch -> Stories chain |
| Depth | 20% | AC testable, ADRs justified, stories estimable |
| Coverage | 10% | Original requirements mapped |
**Quality gate**:
| Gate | Criteria |
|------|----------|
| PASS | Score >= 80% AND coverage >= 70% |
| REVIEW | Score 60-79% OR coverage 50-69% |
| FAIL | Score < 60% OR coverage < 50% |
**Artifacts**: readiness-report.md + spec-summary.md
## Phase 4: Verdict + Discuss
### Code Review Verdict
| Verdict | Criteria |
|---------|----------|
| BLOCK | Critical issues present |
| CONDITIONAL | High/medium only |
| APPROVE | Low or none |
### Spec Quality Discuss (DISCUSS-003)
After generating readiness-report.md, call discuss subagent:
- Artifact: `<session>/spec/readiness-report.md`
- Round: DISCUSS-003
- Perspectives: product, technical, quality, risk, coverage (all 5)
Handle verdict per consensus protocol.
> **Note**: DISCUSS-003 HIGH always triggers user pause (final sign-off gate).
**Report**: mode, verdict/gate, dimension scores, discuss verdict (QUALITY only), output paths.
## Error Handling
| Scenario | Resolution |
|----------|------------|
| Missing context | Request from coordinator |
| Invalid mode | Abort with error |
| Analysis failure | Retry, then fallback |
| Discuss subagent fails | Proceed without discuss, log warning |