/supergraph:review

Final gate before merge. Graph-enhanced review with plan awareness.

Prerequisites

• /supergraph:fix completed (tests pass, lint clean)

Usage

/supergraph:review | plan auth-login | plan auth-login task 2

Steps

0. Announce

"🔍 /supergraph:review — starting graph-enhanced code review..."

1. Select Plan Context

0 plans → skip | 1 → use | >1 → ask | plan <slug> → match. Parse tasks, scope to task N if provided.

2. Capture Git Range

BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse origin/master || git rev-parse origin/main || git rev-parse HEAD~1)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
git diff --stat "$BASE_SHA..$HEAD_SHA" && git diff --name-only "$BASE_SHA..$HEAD_SHA"

Use plan checkpoint commits as range if available. No changed files → check plan for incomplete tasks.

3. Graph Analysis (tiered)

Reindex first for CBM_PROJECT (see references/codebase-memory-contract.md#Lifecycle): index_status; if stale/degraded → index_repository (skip if BASE_SHA unchanged and .supergraph-env fresh). Then codebase-memory-mcp detect_changes, trace_path, get_graph_schema.

Tiered recipes (pick by blast radius):

• Micro (≤2 files, <20 lines, no hub/bridge): cycles + test-gaps only (0.04s)
• Standard (≤5 files, no cross-boundary): cycles/hubs/test-gaps + optional cross-boundary
• Full (>5 files or hub/bridge/cross-boundary): all cycles, hubs, bridges, test-gaps, complexity, cross-boundary (0.12s). Per file: query_graph(query_type="tests", target=file).

3b. Serena (optional, selective): See serena/SKILL.md:Setup. If scan not run, call initial_instructions first. Only for hub/bridge or complexity>10 files: find_referencing_symbols/find_implementations per symbol and get_diagnostics_for_file per file. Otherwise skip. Pass as "Serena findings". Skip if unavailable.

4. Dispatch Code Reviewer (tiered, parallel with tests)

Tiered (pick by blast radius):

• Micro (≤2 files, <20 lines, no hub/bridge): skip code-reviewer agent — tests+lint + cycles+test-gaps đủ, Critical chỉ từ tests/lint/circular (LLM 30-60s saved)
• Standard (≤5 files, no cross-boundary): Stage1 Spec Compliance only, parallel with tests
• Full (>5 files or hub/bridge/cross-boundary): 2-stage (Spec→Quality), parallel with tests. Join before Step 6.

Agent(subagent_type="supergraph:code-reviewer", prompt="Review BASE_SHA..HEAD_SHA. Spec first, then quality (Standard: Stage1 only). BASE_SHA/HEAD_SHA, git diff --stat + git diff (first 300 lines, or --name-only + snippets for large diffs), Graph: hubs/bridges/surprise/flows/gaps, Serena findings, Plan requirements. Output: strengths, Critical/Important/Minor, verdict YES|WITH_FIXES|NO")

5. Verify Tests + Lint (parallel with Step 4 when reviewer runs)

Run $TEST_CMD and $LINT_CMD; if reviewer skipped (Micro), run tests alone. Dedup: if verify just passed with same HEAD_SHA and <120s ago and git diff unchanged, reuse verify evidence; else rerun fresh. Failures → add to Critical. Join both before Classify.

6. Classify Issues

Severity	Sources	Action
Critical	Reviewer Critical, tests/lint fail, circular deps, broken hub API, surprise>0.7, in_progress tasks	Block merge
Important	Reviewer Important, surprise 0.5-0.7, missing hotspot tests, bridge node without validation, stuck tasks	Fix unless risk accepted
Minor	Reviewer Minor, clean graph, good coverage	Note only

7. Checklist

Gate	Check
Blast radius	All affected files handled?
Hub safety	Callers tested? API compatible?
Bridge	Cross-community impact?
Surprise	>0.7 investigate, 0.5-0.7 document
Gaps	Untested hotspots?
TDD	RED/GREEN evidence?

8. Act on Feedback

Critical → fix immediately, no exceptions. Important → fix unless user accepts risk. Push back with evidence, not opinion. Minor → note, optional.

When human gives review feedback:

• Clarify ALL unclear items first, implement together
• Grep codebase before implementing suggested "professional" features (YAGNI)
• Push back gracefully if reviewer is wrong — technical reasoning + tests/proof
• Never performative agreement ("You're absolutely right!")

9. Generate Verdict

## Review Report
- Verdict: PASS | NEEDS_CHANGES | BLOCKED
- Changed: N files | Blast radius: M
- Hub/Bridge: [list/none] | Surprise: [list/none]
- Tests: PASS|FAIL | Lint: PASS|FAIL
- Critical: N | Important: N | Minor: N
- Reasoning: [summary]

Verdict rules:

• PASS → 0 Critical, reviewer YES
• NEEDS_CHANGES → 0 Critical, >0 Important or reviewer WITH_FIXES
• BLOCKED → >0 Critical or reviewer NO

10. Update Plan

PASS + all tasks reviewed → mark Status: completed, add review log. BLOCKED → mark affected tasks stuck, append blocker list.

10b. Update CONTEXT.md (if review surfaced new domain invariants)

If review revealed undocumented domain rules, invariants, or terminology:

printf '\n## <term or invariant>\n[what was discovered]\n' >> CONTEXT.md

Examples: hidden ordering constraints, shared state assumptions, boundary rules between modules.

Serena memory (optional — for non-PASS verdicts): On BLOCKED or NEEDS_CHANGES, persist findings for the next fix cycle:

mcp__serena__write_memory(
  title="<plan-slug>-review-verdict",
  content="Verdict: [BLOCKED|NEEDS_CHANGES]. Critical: [...]. Callers affected: [...]. Diagnostics: [...]"
)

Skip if Serena unavailable or verdict is PASS.

11. Handoff

PASS → ready to merge. NEEDS_CHANGES → /supergraph:fix, then re-review. Max 2 cycles, then escalate. BLOCKED → escalate immediately, no auto-fix.

Rules

• Dispatch code-reviewer per tier (Micro skip, Standard Stage1, Full 2-stage); always join with tests before Classify
• Critical issues block merge — no exceptions
• Hub/bridge changes need extra scrutiny
• Max 2 fix-review cycles, then escalate
• Never pass if tests or lint fail
• Surprise connections must be investigated or documented