/code-review

name: code-review
description: Review local diffs and PRs with specialists and JSON artifacts, or screen an open PR at an evidence gate and advise whether to close it; read-only, never writes to GitHub. Skip pre-implementation problem assessment owned by assess and symptom-first debugging owned by investigate.

<!-- ../../assets/images/code-review-arch.svg diagrams the runs, gates and parallel fan-out. Documentation only, never loaded — update it in the same commit as any change to step order, gate placement, or agent fan-out. -->

<!-- policy-sibling: skills/assess/SKILL.md (Workflow: GitHub read permissions), skills/release/SKILL.md (Workflow: GitHub read permissions), skills/code-remediate/references/intake.md (GitHub read permissions), skills/code-review/references/source-and-scope.md (GitHub read permissions); intentional divergence: this entry delegates collector permissions and recovery to source-and-scope, while assess permits reader or collector evidence and release uses the reader. -->

Code Review

Report evidenced findings, coverage, checks, source judgment, and verification readiness. Review is read-only except run artifacts and isolated review worktrees; never write to GitHub, edit source, install into the project, or claim an instruction-bounded reviewer has an enforced sandbox. Use `code-remediate` for authorized fixes. A review alone does not authorize Challenge Resolve or a review-and-fix loop. Enter the separate iterative workflow only when the user explicitly requests it. Do not propose or ask approval for an unsolicited loop. Existing explicit approval for the same scope remains valid; do not ask again. Only an explicitly requested loop applies `../../shared/adversarial-loop.md`. Before asking, read [User Questions](../../shared/codex-user-questions.md).

Apply the shared [Proportional Execution](../../shared/native-skill-contract.md#proportional-execution) policy when choosing direct analysis or a detailed workflow; this review's source, coverage, artifact, and completion gates still govern a selected detailed route.

Input Schema and entry

{
  "scope": "optional working-tree|path|commit|pr; infer pr for bare number, #number, or PR URL",
  "target": "optional path, commit ref, PR number, PR URL, or current branch PR",
  "done_when": "blocking issues are identified with gate decision"
}

Infer `scope=pr` for a bare PR number, `#number`, PR URL, or current-branch PR; otherwise select `working-tree`, `path`, or `commit` from the request. Reject unsupported flags. Resolve PR identity and apply [PR State Preflight](../../shared/native-skill-contract.md#pr-state-preflight) before prior-report lookup, run creation, or collection, including on resume. A closed or merged PR stops the review. A requested existing report must be validated for the exact target and revision; on lookup or consumer failure use [Report compatibility and recovery](references/report-recovery.md). On resume, keep usable evidence and rerun missing, stale or unverifiable work; an obsolete saved execution plan does not require repairing its protocol. For a new PR invocation, look up a validated eligible completed report before allocating a run. A new review request proceeds fresh without a reuse/fresh question; a prior report is evidence, not a reason to pause. Explicit reuse or resume remains binding: continue an incomplete run at its first unmet checkpoint, or rerun the completed run’s completion gate and emit its validated summary table and findings without claiming current-head freshness. See the entry route before allocating another run. See [Previous completed review lookup](references/source-and-scope.md#previous-completed-review-lookup).

Resume an incomplete run at its first unmet checkpoint, preserving valid frozen source, role results, and checks; revalidate when inputs change. Do not require another user turn or fresh collection merely to repair bookkeeping. Use [GitHub Read Execution](../../shared/native-skill-contract.md#github-read-execution) for PR reads and capability recovery. An actual denial or non-overridable restriction stops the affected read; never broaden or repeat a denied request. Never use forced Git operations automatically.

Read [Review delivery](references/findings-and-completion.md#output-contract) before any user-facing review handoff, including zero findings, preliminary, incomplete, blocked and terminal outcomes. Tables are mandatory under that contract; completion status never makes presentation optional. Preserve its explicit exact caller output and nested delivery exceptions, and do not emit a handoff while a required question is pending.

Workflow

Unstarted reviewer work or gates are pending authorized steps: continue in the current turn without a resume question. After an incorrect helper path or argument error, inspect the packaged helper contract and recover the invocation before considering a user decision; preserve source evidence and actual permission boundaries. Only a concrete missing decision reaches [Incomplete review decision](references/report-recovery.md#incomplete-review-decision): recover missed ordering automatically; apply the interrupted-check exception (`Continue` or `Skip`) only for an actual remaining check decision; otherwise offer exactly `New review`, `Resume last one`, and `Stop`, even when a reusable run exists.

Collect and inspect source

Start every review by asking **“Is this desired behavior for this package?”** Apply the [package-purpose assessment](references/source-and-scope.md#package-purpose-assessment) before judging implementation correctness. Before opening any diff or changed source, including during close screening or online concern triage, establish its independent baseline and apply the [blind blueprint requirement](references/source-and-scope.md#03-t1-primary-diff-review) using only its permitted T0 inputs; write the blueprint or record its applicability skip. Mechanical collection may sa