Claude-skill-registry cdd-review-implementation

IN_REVIEW実装をレビュー(APPROVED→DONE)

install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/data/cdd-review-implementation" ~/.claude/skills/majiayu000-claude-skill-registry-cdd-review-implementation && rm -rf "$T"
manifest: skills/data/cdd-review-implementation/SKILL.md
source content

Implementation Review (Code Phase)

You are conducting an implementation review for decision ID:

$1
.

This review happens after implementation is complete (implementationStatus: IN_REVIEW).

Your Task

Review the implementation code to verify it matches the decision requirements.

1. Read the Decision Document

First, read

CDD/**/*$1*.cdd.md
to understand:

  • Goal: What was supposed to be achieved
  • Selection: What approach was chosen and why
  • Rejections: What alternatives were explicitly rejected (should NOT be in the implementation)
  • Review Criteria: Any specific review points mentioned in the document

2. Check for Review Criteria Section

If the cdd.md contains a

## Review Criteria
section:

  • Read any referenced documents (e.g., "参照: docs/SECURITY.md")
  • Apply the criteria specified in that section
  • Document your findings in the review report

3. Locate Implementation

Two methods to find implementation files:

Method 1: Git commit search (Primary)

Use the Bash tool to search for commits related to this decision:

git log --all --grep="CDD: $1" --name-only --pretty=format:"%H %s"

This will show:

  • Commit hashes and messages containing
    CDD: $1
  • Files changed in those commits

Extract the file list from the commits for review.

Method 2: Code marker search (Fallback for older implementations)

If no commits are found, search for

@cdd #$1
markers (deprecated but may exist in older code):

grep -r "@cdd #$1" --include="*.ts" --include="*.js" --include="*.tsx" --include="*.jsx"

Prefer Method 1 - Git commits are the source of truth for recent implementations.

4. Conduct the Review

Check the following:

Decision Alignment

  • All items in the Selection section are implemented correctly
  • None of the Rejections section items are present in the implementation
  • Implementation follows the constraints and guidelines in the Context section

Code Quality

  • Code follows project conventions and style
  • Appropriate error handling
  • Adequate test coverage

Architecture & Security (if applicable)

  • Follows architectural principles
  • Security best practices applied
  • No security vulnerabilities introduced

5. Generate Review File

Create a review file at:

CDD/.logs/review/$1-{{YYYYMMDD}}-{{sequence}}.md

Use this structure:

---
reviewId: $1-{{YYYYMMDD}}-{{sequence}}
decisionId: $1
decisionFile: {{path to cdd.md}}
reviewDate: '{{YYYY-MM-DDTHH:mm}}'
reviewer: AI
status: [APPROVED|REJECTED|NEEDS_REVISION]
---

## Summary

[Brief overview of the review - 2-3 sentences describing what was reviewed and the outcome]

## Implementation Check

### Decision Alignment

- [x] Selection section items are implemented
  - [Detail what was checked and found]
- [x] Rejections section items are NOT implemented
  - [Detail what was verified]
- [x] Context constraints are followed
  - [Detail compliance]

### Code Quality

- [x] Code follows project conventions
- [x] Error handling is appropriate
- [x] Tests are adequate

## Review Criteria Check

[If Review Criteria section exists in cdd.md, document findings here]

### [Criterion 1]
- Finding: ...
- Status: ✅ Pass / ❌ Fail / ⚠️ Needs attention

### [Criterion 2]
- Finding: ...
- Status: ✅ Pass / ❌ Fail / ⚠️ Needs attention

## Issues Found

[List any issues discovered - omit this section if no issues]

1. **[Issue Title]**
   - Location: file:line
   - Description: ...
   - Severity: Critical / High / Medium / Low
   - Recommendation: ...

## Conclusion

**Status:** [APPROVED|REJECTED|NEEDS_REVISION]

[Final verdict with brief justification]

### Next Steps

[Only if REJECTED or NEEDS_REVISION]
- Action 1
- Action 2

6. Update cdd.md (IMPORTANT)

After creating the review file, you MUST update the cdd.md file to add the review to its

reviewHistory
in the YAML frontmatter:

reviewHistory:
  - date: '{{YYYY-MM-DDTHH:mm}}'
    file: 'CDD/.logs/review/$1-{{YYYYMMDD}}-{{sequence}}.md'
    status: '[APPROVED|REJECTED|NEEDS_REVISION]'

Append this to the existing

reviewHistory
array if it exists, or create the field if it doesn't.

7. Present Results and Update Status

Show the user:

  1. Review status (APPROVED/REJECTED/NEEDS_REVISION)
  2. Key findings (if any issues)
  3. Path to the review file
  4. Confirmation that cdd.md was updated

If Review Status is APPROVED

Use AskUserQuestion tool to confirm:

  • Question: "レビューがAPPROVEDになりました。implementationStatusをDONEに変更しますか?"
  • Options: "はい" / "いいえ"

If "はい":

  • Update the cdd.md file to change
    implementationStatus: DONE
  • Use the Edit tool to update the frontmatter
  • Show confirmation: "✓ Updated implementationStatus to DONE"

If "いいえ":

  • Keep current implementationStatus unchanged
  • Show confirmation: "implementationStatus kept as-is"

Important:

  • Only use AskUserQuestion if the review status is
    APPROVED
  • Do not ask for
    REJECTED
    or
    NEEDS_REVISION
    reviews

File Naming Convention

  • Format:
    $1-{{YYYYMMDD}}-{{sequence}}.md
  • Example:
    PHASE1.1-A-20260120-1.md
  • Sequence number differentiates multiple reviews on the same day
  • Check existing files to determine the next sequence number

Important Notes

  • Be thorough but concise
  • Focus on objective findings, not opinions
  • If uncertain about something, investigate further before making a judgment
  • Use checkboxes ([x] / [ ]) to make findings scannable
  • Always reference specific file locations when mentioning issues
  • The review should be constructive and actionable