heavy-duty-watcher/docs/REVIEW_PLAYBOOK.md

52 lines
1.2 KiB
Markdown
Raw Permalink Normal View History

# Review playbook
## When we act
| Signal | Action |
|--------|--------|
| First review request | Full review |
| Head SHA changed after our review | Re-review delta + full thread |
| Author replies to our blockers | Re-read thread; Approve or keep REQUEST_CHANGES |
| Explicit re-request | Full re-review |
| Nothing material | Silent |
## Verdict ladder
1. **Request changes** — correctness, security, lockout risk, broken contracts, missing tests for the claimed fix
2. **Comment** — design notes, optional improvements, clarifying questions
3. **Approve** — you fully agree; no remaining blockers
## Comment shape
```markdown
**Verdict: Request changes**
### Blockers
1. `path:lines` — what is wrong, why it matters, how to fix
### Nits / optional
-
Happy to re-review once …
```
```markdown
**Verdict: Approve** — I agree with this as-is.
### What closed prior feedback
-
No new blockers.
```
## Peer reviews
If another bot already filed the same blocker:
- Agree in one sentence
- Add only **net-new** signal (missed edge case, test gap, wording overclaim)
## Drafts
Unless explicitly asked for a deep review: high-level risks and understanding only; avoid nitpicking unfinished work.