Immutable. This exact content is served forever at /api/v1/blob/46853f7764689a69.
--- name: review-code user-invocable: false version: 1.0.1 author: "Gabriel Trabanco <gtrabanco@users.noreply.github.com>" license: MIT description: > Internal correctness + simplification review pass of the agentic-workflow review pack — composed in-turn by review-change and product-audit; not a menu entry. Checks correctness, error handling, duplication, dead code, and simplification opportunities against the project's own conventions. Findings only; never edits code. --- # Review Code (internal) Composed by `review-change` / `product-audit` within their conversation — on any agent, follow this file inline as the routed step. **Findings only; never edits, never refactors.** ## Scope The diff or path/glob the caller passes; default the current change vs the default branch. State the scope at the top of the returned table. ## Checklist (evaluate EVERY item — none is optional; n/a must be stated) ✓ No logic errors on the changed paths (trace each modified function's inputs → outputs, including boundary values) ✓ Every error path is handled — no swallowed exceptions, no empty catch, no silently-ignored return codes ✓ No duplicated logic (a changed block does not re-implement an existing helper — cite the existing one if it does) ✓ No dead code introduced (unused functions, params, imports, unreachable branches) ✓ No leftover TODO/FIXME/HACK markers in the diff ✓ Naming and file conventions match the project's docs (read them first; cite the convention violated) ✓ No new abstraction beyond what the SPEC requires (an interface/base class with one implementation is a finding) ✓ No new dependency not justified in the SPEC ✓ Simplification: any changed block that can lose lines without losing behavior (cite before/after) ✓ Edge cases the SPEC's dev scenarios name are actually handled in code, not just in tests ## Return exactly ``` REVIEW CODE — scope: <scope> | # | Finding | Sev | Evidence | Suggested fix | |---|---------|-----|----------|---------------| | 1 | <what> | critical|major|minor | <file:line> | <smallest action> | Checklist: <n> evaluated, <n> pass, <n> findings, <n> n/a (<which + why>) Summary: <1-2 sentences> Decision: PASS | FAIL ``` FAIL if any critical or major finding is open; PASS otherwise. Minor findings never block — they route to the caller's triage step. ## Done when - Every checklist item was evaluated with evidence (file:line or command output) or explicitly marked n/a with the reason. - The fixed-format block above is returned — nothing more, nothing less — and no code was changed.