Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
68 lines (43 loc) · 6.79 KB

File metadata and controls

68 lines (43 loc) · 6.79 KB

First-Party Review Policy

中文审查策略

This policy assigns review responsibilities and evidence requirements for first-party Skill work. It does not make a static check, a specialist finding, or a producer's self-report into final acceptance evidence.

Reviewer vs review-loop vs project-review

Role What it is What it does What it never does
Reviewer (generic-review · code-review · domain) Read-only specialist; see the runtime reviewer contract or the human summary Inspects a bounded target + requirements and returns normalized, evidence-backed Findings: [] Repairs the target, directs the Producer, changes requirements, or issues a final verdict
review-loop Lightweight convergence engine Resolves the reviewer, invokes it, receives findings, returns them to the Producer, re-runs the reviewer, stops when clean or at the bounded repair limit Owns the frozen acceptance baseline or the project final PASS/FAIL/BLOCKED (that belongs to project-review)
project-review Project-level final acceptance owner Freezes the Charter/baseline, composes the right reviewers (generic-review / code-review / domain), drives them through review-loop, validates dispositions, and issues the final PASS / FAIL / BLOCKED Replaces reviewers' methods or invents missing acceptance criteria

Do not put final project acceptance back into review-loop. A reviewer finding never becomes a project verdict without the acceptance owner's judgment.

Review triggers

Use this policy for:

  • a new Skill admission;
  • a change to a Skill's behavior, trigger, invocation type, boundary, dependency, resource, or attribution;
  • any runtime executable script, shared test infrastructure, or installer behavior change;
  • a rename, deprecation, or removal that changes discovery, installation, or migration behavior; and
  • a release candidate containing any of the above.

Documentation-only governance changes still require link, scope, and cross-reference inspection. They do not substitute for the future package-level project-review (via review-loop) acceptance that an admitted Skill requires.

Profile selection and specialist review

Change Required final acceptance Additional specialist evidence
Eligible low-risk prompt-only Skill One fresh independent Evaluator using the fast track in admission Structure/metadata, isolated copy/discovery, deterministic positive/negative contract tests, explicit-use/non-trigger observations, synchronized docs. No separate Critic or code-review.
New or materially changed first-party Skill project-review or review-loop with the agent-skill Profile (project-level vs package-level) Structural, fresh-install, behavioral, invocation, and attribution evidence.
Skill with executable scripts project-review or review-loop with agent-skill Profile Focused automated + negative tests, adversarial/mutation fixtures where appropriate, and code-review findings.
Software artifact inside a Skill project-review owns the verdict; review-loop is its engine code-review supplies Standards/Spec findings.
Manuscript or specification artifact project-review selects manuscript or specification Profile; review-loop drives convergence Artifact-specific evidence and specialist findings.
Release candidate Package-level acceptance plus the Program-level gate Verified release installation and synchronized documentation evidence.

generic-review is the default reviewer when no specialist is more appropriate. code-review is the specialist for bounded git diff (Standards + Spec) — read-only.

Self-contained validation tests for an eligible prompt-only Skill do not by themselves trigger the executable-script row. If a test exercises product code, shared helpers, installers, hooks, subprocesses, network access, or other runtime behavior, the fast track is unavailable and specialist review applies.

Evidence and independence

Producer evidence must identify exact commands, environment, inputs, outputs, revisions, scope, and limitations. The reviewer checks that each evidence item is correctly labeled as structural, installation, behavioral, invocation, script, or review evidence.

The Producer performs repairs. Critics, when required, and Evaluators remain read-only. Every final evaluation uses a fresh, independent Evaluator with the frozen acceptance source and admissible evidence. Reviewers follow the runtime reviewer contract (human summary: REVIEWER_CONTRACT.md) for the normalized input packet (Target · Requirements · Relevant context · Previous findings) and return id/severity/location/problem/reason (+ optional suggestion) — never PASS/FAIL/BLOCKED. The fast track omits the separate Critic stage.

Bounded repair and verdicts

project-review may direct the current Producer to repair only a confirmed, in-scope finding with a bounded correction that can converge within the configured limit. It must stop with FAIL or BLOCKED when repair would require changed requirements, a new architecture decision, multiple new tickets, missing authority, missing environment access, or unavailable independent review.

The final verdict is owned by project-review — never by a reviewer and never by review-loop:

  • PASS: All frozen acceptance conditions and evidence requirements are met.
  • FAIL: A confirmed in-scope condition is unmet and not resolved within the allowed repair path.
  • BLOCKED: Required authority, environment, evidence, or independent review is unavailable.

A candidate with only structural validation, keyword matches, simulated fixtures, or a no-op test run cannot receive a behavior or runtime claim.

Review record and release boundary

Preserve the frozen acceptance source, reviewer findings, repairs, evidence across rounds, final Evaluator result, and exact verdict. For a Skill, link this record from its admission evidence; for a release or project, link the affected package records and the verified installation evidence. Reviewers produce Findings: []; the acceptance owner produces the verdict.

No release, catalog entry, or installation command may imply final acceptance before the required verdict and release checks exist. See admission and maintenance.

Historical note: the final-acceptance capabilities (frozen baseline, final verdict, PASS/FAIL/BLOCKED, scope-change boundary) formerly embedded in review-loop were migrated to project-review (§25 Phase 7). review-loop is now intentionally lightweight.