diff --git a/.claude/skills/bmad-os-review-pr/SKILL.md b/.claude/skills/bmad-os-review-pr/SKILL.md index 67bb05bd5..8adc6d031 100644 --- a/.claude/skills/bmad-os-review-pr/SKILL.md +++ b/.claude/skills/bmad-os-review-pr/SKILL.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ --- name: bmad-os-review-pr -description: Adversarial PR review tool (Raven's Verdict). Cynical deep review transformed into professional engineering findings. Use when user asks to 'review a PR' and provides a PR url or id. +description: Dual-layer PR review tool (Raven's Verdict). Runs adversarial cynical review and edge case hunter in parallel, merges and deduplicates findings into professional engineering output. Use when user asks to 'review a PR' and provides a PR url or id. --- Read `prompts/instructions.md` and execute. diff --git a/.claude/skills/bmad-os-review-pr/prompts/instructions.md b/.claude/skills/bmad-os-review-pr/prompts/instructions.md index 12d150049..c1739e8cf 100644 --- a/.claude/skills/bmad-os-review-pr/prompts/instructions.md +++ b/.claude/skills/bmad-os-review-pr/prompts/instructions.md @@ -93,13 +93,17 @@ gh pr diff {PR_NUMBER} [--repo {REPO}] --name-only | grep -E '\.(png|jpg|jpeg|gi Store list of binary files to skip. Note them in final output. -## Adversarial Review +## Review Layers -### 1.1 Run Cynical Review +**Launch steps 1.1 and 1.2 as parallel subagents** using the Task tool. Both receive the same PR diff and run concurrently. Wait for both to complete before proceeding to step 1.3. + +### 1.1 Run Cynical Review (subagent) + +Spawn a subagent with the following prompt. Pass the full PR diff as context. **INTERNAL PERSONA - Never post this directly:** -Task: You are a cynical, jaded code reviewer with zero patience for sloppy work. This PR was submitted by a clueless weasel and you expect to find problems. Find at least five issues to fix or improve in it. Number them. Be skeptical of everything. Ultrathink. +Task: You are a cynical, jaded code reviewer with zero patience for sloppy work. This PR was submitted by a clueless weasel and you expect to find problems. Find at least five issues to fix or improve in it. Number them. Be skeptical of everything. Output format: @@ -124,14 +128,64 @@ Likely tag: - Add `[likely]` to findings with high confidence, e.g. with direct evidence - Sort findings by severity (Critical → Moderate → Minor), not by confidence +### 1.2 Run Edge Case Hunter (subagent) + +Spawn a subagent that executes the task defined in `_bmad/core/tasks/review-edge-case-hunter.xml`. Pass the full PR diff as the `content` input. Omit `also_consider` unless the user specified extra focus areas. + +The task returns a JSON array of objects, each with: `location`, `trigger_condition`, `guard_snippet`, `potential_consequence`. + +**Map each JSON finding to the standard finding format:** + +```markdown +### [NUMBER]. [trigger_condition] [likely] + +**Severity:** [INFERRED_EMOJI] [INFERRED_LEVEL] + +**`[location]`** — [trigger_condition]. [potential_consequence]. + +**Suggested fix:** +``` +[guard_snippet] +``` +``` + +Severity inference rules for edge case findings: + +- **Critical** — data loss, security, or crash conditions (null deref, unhandled throw, auth bypass) +- **Moderate** — logic errors, silent wrong results, race conditions +- **Minor** — cosmetic edge cases, unlikely boundary conditions + +Add `[likely]` to all edge case findings — they are derived from mechanical path tracing, so confidence is inherently high. + +If the edge case hunter returns zero findings or halts, note it internally and proceed — step 1.1 findings still stand. + +### 1.3 Merge and Deduplicate + +Combine the findings from step 1.1 (adversarial) and step 1.2 (edge case hunter) into a single list. + +**Deduplication rules:** + +1. Compare each edge case finding against each adversarial finding +2. Two findings are duplicates if they reference the same file location AND describe the same gap (use description similarity — same function/variable/condition mentioned) +3. When a duplicate is found, keep the version with more specificity (usually the edge case hunter's, since it includes `guard_snippet`) +4. Mark the kept finding with the source that produced it + +**After dedup, renumber all findings sequentially and sort by severity (Critical → Moderate → Minor).** + +Tag each finding with its source: + +- `[Adversarial]` — from step 1.1 only +- `[Edge Case]` — from step 1.2 only +- `[Both]` — flagged by both layers (deduped) + ## Tone Transformation -**Transform the cynical output into cold engineering professionalism.** +**Transform the merged findings into cold engineering professionalism.** **Transformation rules:** 1. Remove all inflammatory language, insults, assumptions about the author -2. Keep all technical substance, file references, severity ratings and likely tag +2. Keep all technical substance, file references, severity ratings, likely tag, and **source tags** 3. Replace accusatory phrasing with neutral observations: - ❌ "The author clearly didn't think about..." - ✅ "This implementation may not account for..." @@ -140,6 +194,7 @@ Likely tag: - ✅ "This pattern has historically caused issues in production environments" 5. Add the suggested fixes. 6. Keep suggestions actionable and specific +7. Edge case hunter findings need no persona cleanup, but still apply professional formatting consistently Output format after transformation: @@ -149,18 +204,20 @@ Output format after transformation: **Title:** {PR_TITLE} **Author:** @{AUTHOR} **Branch:** {HEAD} → {BASE} +**Review layers:** Adversarial + Edge Case Hunter --- ### Findings -[TRANSFORMED FINDINGS HERE] +[TRANSFORMED FINDINGS HERE — each tagged with source] --- ### Summary **Critical:** {COUNT} | **Moderate:** {COUNT} | **Minor:** {COUNT} +**Sources:** {ADVERSARIAL_COUNT} adversarial | {EDGE_CASE_COUNT} edge case | {BOTH_COUNT} both [BINARY_FILES_NOTE if any] diff --git a/src/core/tasks/review-edge-case-hunter.xml b/src/core/tasks/review-edge-case-hunter.xml index 6e4e7d285..99c6a3b83 100644 --- a/src/core/tasks/review-edge-case-hunter.xml +++ b/src/core/tasks/review-edge-case-hunter.xml @@ -15,16 +15,16 @@ Ignore the rest of the codebase unless the provided content explicitly reference Return ONLY a valid JSON array of objects. Each object must contain exactly these four fields and nothing else: -{ +[{ "location": "file:line", "trigger_condition": "one-line description (max 15 words)", "guard_snippet": "minimal code sketch that closes the gap", "potential_consequence": "what could actually go wrong (max 15 words)" -} -No extra text, no explanations, no markdown wrapping. +}] +No extra text, no explanations, no markdown wrapping. An empty array [] is valid when no unhandled paths are found. - MANDATORY: Execute ALL steps in the flow section IN EXACT ORDER + MANDATORY: Execute steps in the flow section IN EXACT ORDER unless a halt-condition triggers DO NOT skip steps or change the sequence HALT immediately when halt-conditions are met Each action xml tag within step xml tag is a REQUIRED action to complete that step @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ No extra text, no explanations, no markdown wrapping. Load the content to review from provided input or context - If content to review is empty, ask for clarification and abort task + If content to review is empty or unreadable, HALT per halt-conditions Identify content type (diff, full file, or function) to determine scope rules @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ No extra text, no explanations, no markdown wrapping. - HALT if zero findings - this is suspicious, re-analyze or ask for guidance + If zero findings after initial analysis, re-analyze once with increased scrutiny. If still zero, return empty array []. HALT if content is empty or unreadable