[IMPORTANT] Use

TaskCreate

to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting — including tasks for each file read. This prevents context loss from long files. For simple tasks, AI MUST ATTENTION ask user whether to skip.

<!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset -->

Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.

<!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset --> <!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention -->

AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:

• Check downstream references before deleting. Deleting components causes documentation and code staleness cascades. Map all referencing files before removal.
• Verify AI-generated content against actual code. AI hallucinates APIs, class names, and method signatures. Always grep to confirm existence before documenting or referencing.
• Trace full dependency chain after edits. Changing a definition misses downstream variables and consumers derived from it. Always trace the full chain.
• Trace ALL code paths when verifying correctness. Confirming code exists is not confirming it executes. Always trace early exits, error branches, and conditional skips — not just happy path.
• When debugging, ask "whose responsibility?" before fixing. Trace whether bug is in caller (wrong data) or callee (wrong handling). Fix at responsible layer — never patch symptom site.
• Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Before changing any constant, limit, flag, or pattern: read comments, check git blame, examine surrounding code.
• Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. Changes touching multiple stacks require verifying EVERY output. One green check is not all green checks.
• Holistic-first debugging — resist nearest-attention trap. When investigating any failure, list EVERY precondition first (config, env vars, DB names, endpoints, DI registrations, data preconditions), then verify each against evidence before forming any code-layer hypothesis.
• Surgical changes — apply the diff test. Bug fix: every changed line must trace directly to the bug. Don't restyle or improve adjacent code. Enhancement task: implement improvements AND announce them explicitly.
• Surface ambiguity before coding — don't pick silently. If request has multiple interpretations, present each with effort estimate and ask. Never assume all-records, file-based, or more complex path.

<!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention -->

Prerequisites: MUST ATTENTION READ before executing:

<!-- SYNC:understand-code-first -->

Understand Code First — HARD-GATE: Do NOT write, plan, or fix until you READ existing code.

1. Search 3+ similar patterns (

   grep

   /

   glob

   ) — cite

   file:line

   evidence
2. Read existing files in target area — understand structure, base classes, conventions
3. Run

   python .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --json

   when

   .code-graph/graph.db

   exists
4. Map dependencies via

   connections

   or

   callers_of

   — know what depends on your target
5. Write investigation to

   .ai/workspace/analysis/

   for non-trivial tasks (3+ files)
6. Re-read analysis file before implementing — never work from memory alone
7. NEVER invent new patterns when existing ones work — match exactly or document deviation

BLOCKED until:

- [ ]

Read target files

- [ ]

Grep 3+ patterns

- [ ]

Graph trace (if graph.db exists)

- [ ]

Assumptions verified with evidence

<!-- /SYNC:understand-code-first --> <!-- SYNC:design-patterns-quality -->

Design Patterns Quality — Priority checks for every code change:

1. DRY via OOP: Same-suffix classes (

   *Entity

   ,

   *Dto

   ,

   *Service

   ) MUST ATTENTION share base class. 3+ similar patterns → extract to shared abstraction.
2. Right Responsibility: Logic in LOWEST layer (Entity > Domain Service > Application Service > Controller). Never business logic in controllers.
3. SOLID: Single responsibility (one reason to change). Open-closed (extend, don't modify). Liskov (subtypes substitutable). Interface segregation (small interfaces). Dependency inversion (depend on abstractions).
4. After extraction/move/rename: Grep ENTIRE scope for dangling references. Zero tolerance.
5. YAGNI gate: NEVER recommend patterns unless 3+ occurrences exist. Don't extract for hypothetical future use.

Anti-patterns to flag: God Object, Copy-Paste inheritance, Circular Dependency, Leaky Abstraction.

<!-- /SYNC:design-patterns-quality -->

• docs/project-reference/domain-entities-reference.md

  — Domain entity catalog, relationships, cross-service sync (read when task involves business entities/models) (content auto-injected by hook — check for [Injected: ...] header before reading)

External Memory: For complex or lengthy work (research, analysis, scan, review), write intermediate findings and final results to a report file in

plans/reports/

— prevents context loss and serves as deliverable.

Evidence Gate: MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — every claim, finding, and recommendation requires

file:line

proof or traced evidence with confidence percentage (>80% to act, <80% must verify first).

OOP & DRY Enforcement: MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — flag duplicated patterns that should be extracted to a base class, generic, or helper. Classes in the same group or suffix (ex *Entity, *Dto, *Service, etc...) MUST ATTENTION inherit a common base (even if empty now — enables future shared logic and child overrides). Verify project has code linting/analyzer configured for the stack.

Quick Summary

Goal: Simplify and refine code for clarity, consistency, and maintainability while preserving all functionality.

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Plan ToDo Task to READ the following project-specific reference docs:

• docs/project-reference/code-review-rules.md

  — anti-patterns, review checklists, quality standards (READ FIRST)

• project-structure-reference.md

  — project patterns and structure

If files not found, search for: project documentation, coding standards, architecture docs.

Workflow:

1. Identify Targets — Recent git changes or specified files (skip generated/vendor)
2. Analyze — Find complexity hotspots (nesting >3, methods >20 lines), duplicates, naming issues
3. Apply Simplifications — One refactoring type at a time following KISS/DRY/YAGNI
4. Verify — Run related tests, confirm no behavior changes
5. Fresh-Context Verification — Spawn code-reviewer sub-agent to validate simplifications

Key Rules:

• Preserve all existing functionality; no behavior changes
• Follow platform patterns (Entity expressions, fluent helpers, project store base (search for: store base class), BEM)
• Keep tests passing after every change

Frontend/UI Context (if applicable)

When this task involves frontend or UI changes,

<!-- SYNC:ui-system-context -->

UI System Context — For ANY task touching

.ts

,

.html

,

.scss

, or

.css

files:

MUST ATTENTION READ before implementing:

1. docs/project-reference/frontend-patterns-reference.md

   — component base classes, stores, forms

2. docs/project-reference/scss-styling-guide.md

   — BEM methodology, SCSS variables, mixins, responsive

3. docs/project-reference/design-system/README.md

   — design tokens, component inventory, icons

Reference

docs/project-config.json

for project-specific paths.

<!-- /SYNC:ui-system-context -->

• Component patterns:

  docs/project-reference/frontend-patterns-reference.md

• Styling/BEM guide:

  docs/project-reference/scss-styling-guide.md

• Design system tokens:

  docs/project-reference/design-system/README.md

Code Simplifier Skill

Simplify and refine code for clarity, consistency, and maintainability.

Usage

/code-simplifier                    # Simplify recently modified files
/code-simplifier path/to/file.ts    # Simplify specific file
/code-simplifier --scope=function   # Focus on function-level simplification

Simplification Mindset

Be skeptical. Verify before simplifying. Every change needs proof it preserves behavior.

• Do NOT assume code is redundant — verify by tracing call paths and reading implementations
• Before removing/replacing code, grep for all usages to confirm nothing depends on the current form
• Before flagging a convention violation, grep for 3+ existing examples — codebase convention wins
• Every simplification must include

  file:line

  evidence of what was verified
• If unsure whether simplification preserves behavior, do NOT apply it

What It Does

1. Analyzes code for unnecessary complexity
2. Identifies opportunities to simplify without changing behavior
3. Applies KISS, DRY, and YAGNI principles
4. Preserves all existing functionality
5. Follows convention — grep for 3+ existing patterns before applying simplifications

Readability Checklist (MUST ATTENTION evaluate)

Before finishing, verify the code is easy to read, easy to maintain, easy to understand:

• Schema visibility — If a function computes a data structure (object, map, config), add a comment showing the output shape so readers don't have to trace the code
• Non-obvious data flows — If data transforms through multiple steps (A → B → C), add a brief comment explaining the pipeline
• Self-documenting signatures — Function params should explain their role; remove unused params
• Magic values — Replace unexplained numbers/strings with named constants or add inline rationale
• Naming clarity — Variables/functions should reveal intent without reading the implementation

Simplification Targets

• Redundant code paths
• Over-engineered abstractions
• Unnecessary comments (self-documenting code preferred)
• Complex conditionals that can be flattened
• Verbose patterns that have simpler alternatives

Execution

Use the

code-simplifier:code-simplifier

subagent:

Task(subagent_type="code-simplifier:code-simplifier", prompt="Review and simplify [target files]")

Examples

Before:

function getData() {
    const result = fetchData();
    if (result !== null && result !== undefined) {
        return result;
    } else {
        return null;
    }
}

After:

function getData() {
    return fetchData() ?? null;
}

Workflow

1. Identify targets

   • If no arguments:

     git diff --name-only HEAD~1

     for recent changes
   • If arguments provided: use specified files/patterns
   • Skip: generated code, migrations, vendor files

2. Analyze each file

   • Identify complexity hotspots (nesting > 3, methods > 20 lines)
   • Find duplicated code patterns
   • Check naming clarity

3. Design Pattern Assessment (per

   design-patterns-quality-checklist.md

   )
   • DRY/Abstraction: Flag duplicate patterns extractable to base class, generic, or helper
   • Right Responsibility: Verify logic is in lowest appropriate layer (Entity > Service > Component)
   • Pattern Opportunities: Check for creational/structural/behavioral pattern opportunities (switch→Strategy, scattered new→Factory, etc.)
   • Anti-Patterns: Flag God Objects, Copy-Paste, Circular Dependencies, Singleton overuse
   • Guard against over-engineering: Only recommend patterns with evidence of 3+ occurrences of the problem

4. Apply simplifications

   • One refactoring type at a time
   • Preserve all functionality
   • Follow platform patterns

5. Verify

   • Run related tests if available
   • Confirm no behavior changes

Project Patterns

Backend

• Extract to entity static expressions (search for: entity expression pattern)
• Use fluent helpers (search for: fluent helper pattern in docs/project-reference/backend-patterns-reference.md)
• Move mapping to DTO mapping methods (search for: DTO mapping pattern)
• Use project validation fluent API (see docs/project-reference/backend-patterns-reference.md)
• Check entity expressions have database indexes
• Verify document database index methods exist for collections

[IMPORTANT] Database Performance Protocol (MANDATORY):

1. Paging Required — ALL list/collection queries MUST ATTENTION use pagination. NEVER load all records into memory. Verify: no unbounded

   GetAll()

   ,

   ToList()

   , or

   Find()

   without

   Skip/Take

   or cursor-based paging.
2. Index Required — ALL query filter fields, foreign keys, and sort columns MUST ATTENTION have database indexes configured. Verify: entity expressions match index field order, database collections have index management methods, migrations include indexes for WHERE/JOIN/ORDER BY columns.

Frontend

• Use

  project store base (search for: store base class)

  for state management
• Apply subscription cleanup pattern (search for: subscription cleanup pattern) to all subscriptions
• Ensure BEM class naming on all template elements
• Use platform base classes (

  project base component (search for: base component class)

  ,

  project store component base (search for: store component base class)

  )

Constraints

• Preserve functionality — No behavior changes
• Keep tests passing — Verify after changes
• Follow patterns — Use platform conventions
• Document intent — Add comments only where non-obvious
• Doc staleness — After simplifications, cross-reference changed files against related docs (feature docs, test specs, READMEs); flag any that need updating

<!-- SYNC:shared-protocol-duplication-policy -->

Shared Protocol Duplication Policy — Inline protocol content in skills (wrapped in

<!-- SYNC:tag -->

) is INTENTIONAL duplication. Do NOT extract, deduplicate, or replace with file references. AI compliance drops significantly when protocols are behind file-read indirection. To update: edit

.claude/skills/shared/sync-inline-versions.md

first, then grep

SYNC:protocol-name

and update all occurrences.

<!-- /SYNC:shared-protocol-duplication-policy -->

Graph Intelligence (RECOMMENDED if graph.db exists)

If

.code-graph/graph.db

exists, enhance analysis with structural queries:

• Verify no callers break after simplification:

  python .claude/scripts/code_graph query callers_of <function> --json

• Check dependents:

  python .claude/scripts/code_graph query importers_of <module> --json

• Batch analysis:

  python .claude/scripts/code_graph batch-query file1 file2 --json

Graph-Trace Before Simplification

When graph DB is available, BEFORE simplifying code, trace to understand what depends on it:

• python .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file-to-simplify> --direction downstream --json

  — all downstream consumers that depend on current behavior
• Verify simplified code preserves the same interface for all traced consumers
• Cross-service MESSAGE_BUS consumers are especially fragile — they may depend on exact message shape

Related

• code-review

• refactoring

---

Fresh Sub-Agent Verification (MANDATORY after simplifications in a review workflow)

After simplifications are applied, verification requires a fresh sub-agent review to eliminate confirmation bias. See

SYNC:double-round-trip-review

+

SYNC:fresh-context-review

+

SYNC:review-protocol-injection

(all inlined below).

<!-- SYNC:double-round-trip-review -->

Deep Multi-Round Review — Escalating rounds. Round 1 in main session. Round 2+ and EVERY recursive re-review iteration MUST use a fresh sub-agent.

Round 1: Main-session review. Read target files, build understanding, note issues. Output baseline findings.

Round 2: MANDATORY fresh sub-agent review — see

SYNC:fresh-context-review

for the spawn mechanism and

SYNC:review-protocol-injection

for the canonical Agent prompt template. The sub-agent re-reads ALL files from scratch with ZERO Round 1 memory. It must catch:

• Cross-cutting concerns missed in Round 1
• Interaction bugs between changed files
• Convention drift (new code vs existing patterns)
• Missing pieces that should exist but don't
• Subtle edge cases the main session rationalized away

Round 3+ (recursive after fixes): After ANY fix cycle, MANDATORY fresh sub-agent re-review. Spawn a NEW Agent tool call each iteration — never reuse Round 2's agent. Each new agent re-reads ALL files from scratch with full protocol injection. Continue until PASS or 3 fresh-subagent rounds max, then escalate to user via

AskUserQuestion

.

Rules:

• NEVER declare PASS after Round 1 alone
• NEVER reuse a sub-agent across rounds — every iteration spawns a NEW Agent call
• Main agent READS sub-agent reports but MUST NOT filter, reinterpret, or override findings
• Max 3 fresh-subagent rounds per review — if still FAIL, escalate via

  AskUserQuestion

  (do NOT silently loop)
• Track round count in conversation context (session-scoped)
• Final verdict must incorporate ALL rounds

Report must include

## Round N Findings (Fresh Sub-Agent)

for every round N≥2.

<!-- /SYNC:double-round-trip-review --> <!-- SYNC:fresh-context-review -->

Fresh Sub-Agent Review — Eliminate orchestrator confirmation bias via isolated sub-agents.

Why: The main agent knows what it (or

/cook

) just fixed and rationalizes findings accordingly. A fresh sub-agent has ZERO memory, re-reads from scratch, and catches what the main agent dismissed. Sub-agent bias is mitigated by (1) fresh context, (2) verbatim protocol injection, (3) main agent not filtering the report.

When: Round 2 of ANY review AND every recursive re-review iteration after fixes. NOT needed when Round 1 already PASSes with zero issues.

How:

1. Spawn a NEW

   Agent

   tool call — use

   code-reviewer

   subagent_type for code reviews,

   general-purpose

   for plan/doc/artifact reviews
2. Inject ALL required review protocols VERBATIM into the prompt — see

   SYNC:review-protocol-injection

   for the full list and template. Never reference protocols by file path; AI compliance drops behind file-read indirection (see

   SYNC:shared-protocol-duplication-policy

   )
3. Sub-agent re-reads ALL target files from scratch via its own tool calls — never pass file contents inline in the prompt
4. Sub-agent writes structured report to

   plans/reports/{review-type}-round{N}-{date}.md

5. Main agent reads the report, integrates findings into its own report, DOES NOT override or filter

Rules:

• NEVER reuse a sub-agent across rounds — every iteration spawns a NEW

  Agent

  call
• NEVER skip fresh-subagent review because "last round was clean" — every fix triggers a fresh round
• Max 3 fresh-subagent rounds per review — escalate via

  AskUserQuestion

  if still failing; do NOT silently loop or fall back to any prior protocol
• Track iteration count in conversation context (session-scoped, no persistent files)

<!-- /SYNC:fresh-context-review --> <!-- SYNC:review-protocol-injection -->

Review Protocol Injection — Every fresh sub-agent review prompt MUST embed 10 protocol blocks VERBATIM. The template below has ALL 10 bodies already expanded inline. Copy the template wholesale into the Agent call's

prompt

field at runtime, replacing only the

{placeholders}

in Task / Round / Reference Docs / Target Files / Output sections with context-specific values. Do NOT touch the embedded protocol sections.

Why inline expansion: Placeholder markers would force file-read indirection at runtime. AI compliance drops significantly behind indirection (see

SYNC:shared-protocol-duplication-policy

). Therefore the template carries all 10 protocol bodies pre-embedded.

Subagent Type Selection

• code-reviewer

  — for code reviews (reviewing source files, git diffs, implementation)

• general-purpose

  — for plan / doc / artifact reviews (reviewing markdown plans, docs, specs)

Canonical Agent Call Template (Copy Verbatim)

Agent({
  description: "Fresh Round {N} review",
  subagent_type: "code-reviewer",
  prompt: `
## Task
{review-specific task — e.g., "Review all uncommitted changes for code quality" | "Review plan files under {plan-dir}" | "Review integration tests in {path}"}

## Round
Round {N}. You have ZERO memory of prior rounds. Re-read all target files from scratch via your own tool calls. Do NOT trust anything from the main agent beyond this prompt.

## Protocols (follow VERBATIM — these are non-negotiable)

### Evidence-Based Reasoning
Speculation is FORBIDDEN. Every claim needs proof.
1. Cite file:line, grep results, or framework docs for EVERY claim
2. Declare confidence: >80% act freely, 60-80% verify first, <60% DO NOT recommend
3. Cross-service validation required for architectural changes
4. "I don't have enough evidence" is valid and expected output
BLOCKED until: Evidence file path (file:line) provided; Grep search performed; 3+ similar patterns found; Confidence level stated.
Forbidden without proof: "obviously", "I think", "should be", "probably", "this is because".
If incomplete → output: "Insufficient evidence. Verified: [...]. Not verified: [...]."

### Bug Detection
MUST check categories 1-4 for EVERY review. Never skip.
1. Null Safety: Can params/returns be null? Are they guarded? Optional chaining gaps? .find() returns checked?
2. Boundary Conditions: Off-by-one (< vs <=)? Empty collections handled? Zero/negative values? Max limits?
3. Error Handling: Try-catch scope correct? Silent swallowed exceptions? Error types specific? Cleanup in finally?
4. Resource Management: Connections/streams closed? Subscriptions unsubscribed on destroy? Timers cleared? Memory bounded?
5. Concurrency (if async): Missing await? Race conditions on shared state? Stale closures? Retry storms?
6. Stack-Specific: JS: === vs ==, typeof null. C#: async void, missing using, LINQ deferred execution.
Classify: CRITICAL (crash/corrupt) → FAIL | HIGH (incorrect behavior) → FAIL | MEDIUM (edge case) → WARN | LOW (defensive) → INFO.

### Design Patterns Quality
Priority checks for every code change:
1. DRY via OOP: Same-suffix classes (*Entity, *Dto, *Service) MUST share base class. 3+ similar patterns → extract to shared abstraction.
2. Right Responsibility: Logic in LOWEST layer (Entity > Domain Service > Application Service > Controller). Never business logic in controllers.
3. SOLID: Single responsibility (one reason to change). Open-closed (extend, don't modify). Liskov (subtypes substitutable). Interface segregation (small interfaces). Dependency inversion (depend on abstractions).
4. After extraction/move/rename: Grep ENTIRE scope for dangling references. Zero tolerance.
5. YAGNI gate: NEVER recommend patterns unless 3+ occurrences exist. Don't extract for hypothetical future use.
Anti-patterns to flag: God Object, Copy-Paste inheritance, Circular Dependency, Leaky Abstraction.

### Logic & Intention Review
Verify WHAT code does matches WHY it was changed.
1. Change Intention Check: Every changed file MUST serve the stated purpose. Flag unrelated changes as scope creep.
2. Happy Path Trace: Walk through one complete success scenario through changed code.
3. Error Path Trace: Walk through one failure/edge case scenario through changed code.
4. Acceptance Mapping: If plan context available, map every acceptance criterion to a code change.
NEVER mark review PASS without completing both traces (happy + error path).

### Test Spec Verification
Map changed code to test specifications.
1. From changed files → find TC-{FEAT}-{NNN} in docs/business-features/{Service}/detailed-features/{Feature}.md Section 15.
2. Every changed code path MUST map to a corresponding TC (or flag as "needs TC").
3. New functions/endpoints/handlers → flag for test spec creation.
4. Verify TC evidence fields point to actual code (file:line, not stale references).
5. Auth changes → TC-{FEAT}-02x exist? Data changes → TC-{FEAT}-01x exist?
6. If no specs exist → log gap and recommend /tdd-spec.
NEVER skip test mapping. Untested code paths are the #1 source of production bugs.

### Fix-Layer Accountability
NEVER fix at the crash site. Trace the full flow, fix at the owning layer. The crash site is a SYMPTOM, not the cause.
MANDATORY before ANY fix:
1. Trace full data flow — Map the complete path from data origin to crash site across ALL layers (storage → backend → API → frontend → UI). Identify where bad state ENTERS, not where it CRASHES.
2. Identify the invariant owner — Which layer's contract guarantees this value is valid? Fix at the LOWEST layer that owns the invariant, not the highest layer that consumes it.
3. One fix, maximum protection — If fix requires touching 3+ files with defensive checks, you are at the wrong layer — go lower.
4. Verify no bypass paths — Confirm all data flows through the fix point. Check for direct construction skipping factories, clone/spread without re-validation, raw data not wrapped in domain models, mutations outside the model layer.
BLOCKED until: Full data flow traced (origin → crash); Invariant owner identified with file:line evidence; All access sites audited (grep count); Fix layer justified (lowest layer that protects most consumers).
Anti-patterns (REJECT): "Fix it where it crashes" (crash site ≠ cause site, trace upstream); "Add defensive checks at every consumer" (scattered defense = wrong layer); "Both fix is safer" (pick ONE authoritative layer).

### Rationalization Prevention
AI skips steps via these evasions. Recognize and reject:
- "Too simple for a plan" → Simple + wrong assumptions = wasted time. Plan anyway.
- "I'll test after" → RED before GREEN. Write/verify test first.
- "Already searched" → Show grep evidence with file:line. No proof = no search.
- "Just do it" → Still need TaskCreate. Skip depth, never skip tracking.
- "Just a small fix" → Small fix in wrong location cascades. Verify file:line first.
- "Code is self-explanatory" → Future readers need evidence trail. Document anyway.
- "Combine steps to save time" → Combined steps dilute focus. Each step has distinct purpose.

### Graph-Assisted Investigation
MANDATORY when .code-graph/graph.db exists.
HARD-GATE: MUST run at least ONE graph command on key files before concluding any investigation.
Pattern: Grep finds files → trace --direction both reveals full system flow → Grep verifies details.
- Investigation/Scout: trace --direction both on 2-3 entry files
- Fix/Debug: callers_of on buggy function + tests_for
- Feature/Enhancement: connections on files to be modified
- Code Review: tests_for on changed functions
- Blast Radius: trace --direction downstream
CLI: python .claude/scripts/code_graph {command} --json. Use --node-mode file first (10-30x less noise), then --node-mode function for detail.

### Understand Code First
HARD-GATE: Do NOT write, plan, or fix until you READ existing code.
1. Search 3+ similar patterns (grep/glob) — cite file:line evidence.
2. Read existing files in target area — understand structure, base classes, conventions.
3. Run python .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --json when .code-graph/graph.db exists.
4. Map dependencies via connections or callers_of — know what depends on your target.
5. Write investigation to .ai/workspace/analysis/ for non-trivial tasks (3+ files).
6. Re-read analysis file before implementing — never work from memory alone.
7. NEVER invent new patterns when existing ones work — match exactly or document deviation.
BLOCKED until: Read target files; Grep 3+ patterns; Graph trace (if graph.db exists); Assumptions verified with evidence.

## Reference Docs (READ before reviewing)
- docs/project-reference/code-review-rules.md
- {skill-specific reference docs — e.g., integration-test-reference.md for integration-test-review; backend-patterns-reference.md for backend reviews; frontend-patterns-reference.md for frontend reviews}

## Target Files
{explicit file list OR "run git diff to see uncommitted changes" OR "read all files under {plan-dir}"}

## Output
Write a structured report to plans/reports/{review-type}-round{N}-{date}.md with sections:
- Status: PASS | FAIL
- Issue Count: {number}
- Critical Issues (with file:line evidence)
- High Priority Issues (with file:line evidence)
- Medium / Low Issues
- Cross-cutting findings

Return the report path and status to the main agent.
Every finding MUST have file:line evidence. Speculation is forbidden.
`
})

Rules

• DO copy the template wholesale — including all 10 embedded protocol sections
• DO replace only the

  {placeholders}

  in Task / Round / Reference Docs / Target Files / Output sections with context-specific content
• DO choose

  code-reviewer

  subagent_type for code reviews and

  general-purpose

  for plan / doc / artifact reviews
• DO NOT paraphrase, summarize, or skip any protocol section
• DO NOT pass file contents inline — the sub-agent reads via its own tool calls so it has a fresh context
• DO NOT reference protocols by file path or tag name — the bodies are already embedded above
• DO NOT introduce placeholder markers for the protocols — they must stay literally expanded

<!-- /SYNC:review-protocol-injection -->

When used standalone (outside a review workflow), run

/workflow-review-changes

to trigger the full review cycle with fresh sub-agent re-review.

Workflow Recommendation

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — NO EXCEPTIONS: If you are NOT already in a workflow, you MUST ATTENTION use

AskUserQuestion

to ask the user. Do NOT judge task complexity or decide this is "simple enough to skip" — the user decides whether to use a workflow, not you:

1. Activate

   quality-audit

   workflow (Recommended) — code-simplifier → review-changes → code-review
2. Execute

   /code-simplifier

   directly — run this skill standalone

---

Next Steps

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — NO EXCEPTIONS after completing this skill, you MUST ATTENTION use

AskUserQuestion

to present these options. Do NOT skip because the task seems "simple" or "obvious" — the user decides:

• "/workflow-review-changes (Recommended)" — Review all changes before commit
• "/code-review" — Full code review
• "Skip, continue manually" — user decides

AI Agent Integrity Gate (NON-NEGOTIABLE)

Completion ≠ Correctness. Before reporting ANY work done, prove it:

1. Grep every removed name. Extraction/rename/delete touched N files? Grep confirms 0 dangling refs across ALL file types.
2. Ask WHY before changing. Existing values are intentional until proven otherwise. No "fix" without traced rationale.
3. Verify ALL outputs. One build passing ≠ all builds passing. Check every affected stack.
4. Evaluate pattern fit. Copying nearby code? Verify preconditions match — same scope, lifetime, base class, constraints.
5. New artifact = wired artifact. Created something? Prove it's registered, imported, and reachable by all consumers.

Closing Reminders

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using

TaskCreate

BEFORE starting. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION validate decisions with user via

AskUserQuestion

— never auto-decide. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION READ the following files before starting:

<!-- SYNC:understand-code-first:reminder -->

• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search 3+ existing patterns and read code BEFORE any modification. Run graph trace when graph.db exists. <!-- /SYNC:understand-code-first:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:design-patterns-quality:reminder -->
• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION check DRY via OOP (same-suffix → base class), right responsibility (lowest layer), SOLID. Grep for dangling refs after changes. <!-- /SYNC:design-patterns-quality:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:ui-system-context:reminder -->
• MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION read frontend-patterns-reference, scss-styling-guide, design-system/README before any UI change. <!-- /SYNC:ui-system-context:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder -->
• MUST ATTENTION apply critical thinking — every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact. <!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder --> <!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->
• MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — holistic-first debugging, fix at responsible layer, surface ambiguity before coding, re-read files after compaction. <!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->