assist-review · diff
git:20260406.661d690 to git:20260426.17a2037
23 added, 8 removed. Audit A to A.
---
name: assist-review
- description: Designed to lower cognitive load for a human reviewer by auditing specifically for architectural risks mapped to the original track specification.
+ description: Lower cognitive load for human reviewers by auditing specifically for architectural risks mapped to the original track specification.
---
# Draft Assist Review: Human-in-the-Loop Gateway
Help human reviewers effectively review an executed track without shifting the entire cognitive burden onto them.
## Red Flags - STOP if you're:
- Conducting standard unit tests; use `/draft:review` for that.
- Fixing code rather than explaining logic and risk profiles to the human.
- Reviewing output without first summarizing the source `spec.md` intent.
---
## Workflow Constraints
- 1. **Context Extraction:**
- - Load `draft/tracks/<id>/spec.md` and `draft/tracks/<id>/plan.md`.
+ 1. **Context Extraction:**
+ - Load the track's `spec.md` and `plan.md`.
- Re-summarize the **Intent** of what this track was supposed to achieve in exactly two sentences.
+
2. **Blast Radius Isolation:**
- Scan the `git diff` generated by the target track.
- - Separate trivial edits (naming, routing adjustments) from **Structural Edits** (schema updates, concurrency alterations, middleware auth changes).
- 3. **Draft the Human Helper Guide:**
- - Instead of a traditional bug hunt, generate an executive summary containing a `Risk Assessment`.
- - Write out: *“I chose to implement `[Specific File/Function]` using the `[Pattern]` because the `architecture.md` mandated it. You should specifically scrutinize lines X through Y because they influence global state."*
+ - Separate trivial edits (naming, routing adjustments, formatting) from **Structural Edits** (schema updates, concurrency alterations, middleware auth changes, API surface changes).
+ - Present structural edits first — these are where review time should be spent.
+
+ 3. **Generate the Human Helper Guide:**
+ - Instead of a traditional bug hunt, generate an executive summary containing a **Risk Assessment**.
+ - For each structural edit, write: *"I chose to implement `[Specific File/Function]` using the `[Pattern]` because the `architecture.md` mandated it. You should specifically scrutinize lines X through Y because they influence global state."*
+ - Highlight any code that touches shared state, auth boundaries, data persistence, or concurrency.
+
4. **Knowledge Base Verification:**
- - Verify if any pattern implemented violates the `draft/guardrails.md` learned anti-patterns. If so, specifically direct the human reviewer to veto the PR unless an ADR is created.
+ - Verify if any pattern implemented violates the `draft/guardrails.md` learned anti-patterns.
+ - If so, specifically direct the human reviewer to veto the change unless an ADR is created via `/draft:adr`.
+
+ 5. **Output Format:**
+ - **Track Intent** (2 sentences)
+ - **Structural Edits** (table: file, change type, risk level, review guidance)
+ - **Trivial Edits** (collapsed list — skim only)
+ - **Guardrail Violations** (if any — with ADR recommendation)
+ - **Suggested Review Order** (which files to review first, based on blast radius)
+
+ ---