Deep Review

Multi-dimensional code review built on independent subagents. Review breadth comes from parallel dimension coverage; precision comes from adversarial verification and global duplicate consolidation before findings reach the report.

Core principles

Every design choice below serves one of these. When unsure how to execute a step, come back here.

1. Anti-hallucination — reviewers that only see diff fragments invent bugs. Candidate findings are therefore falsified one by one by an independent verify subagent that reads full context and returns a three-way verdict (confirmed / false_positive / need_more_context). Three-way verdicts beat confidence percentages: calibrated-sounding scores are unreliable as hard filters.
2. Anti self-approval — an agent that just wrote the code is grading its own homework and will pass it. Review must run in independent subagents with a third-party reviewer stance. Never silently degrade deep mode to "the main agent reviews and then verifies its own findings".
3. Rules over model — review quality comes from fine-grained, executable dimension rules, not from a smarter model. Subagents run on balanced/fast model tiers; each dimension file tells them exactly how to check, what counts, and what does not.
4. Calibrate to codebase and lifespan — hold the diff to the standard the codebase already meets, not an idealized one. If a pattern is widespread in the existing code and this diff does not make it worse, it is not a finding. Declared-temporary code (time-boxed campaign, experiment, one-off script) is judged against its lifespan: hardcoding and low-extensibility shortcuts are the intended trade-off for shipping fast, and "delete the code at expiry" is a valid plan — do not demand configurability from code built to be deleted. (Security is exempt from all calibration — see the dimension file.)
5. Speed is a feature — one wave of parallel reviewers, verification pipelined per dimension (never a global barrier), irrelevant dimensions pruned up front.

Two entry modes

Do not auto-escalate light to deep. Do not run deep mode for a casual "看看这个改动" — that is light mode.

Dimensions

Rules live in one place: references/dimensions/, one file per dimension. Both modes read the same files. Light mode reads the full Quick checklist section, including nested example subsections; deep-mode agents read the full dimension file plus only the rule sources and routed references applicable to the touched surface.

Verified? no means findings from that dimension are objective state checks or advisories — they skip the verify pass and go straight to the report. yes + checks means the dimension's findings are verified normally, but it also emits a second, unverified output — release_checks, pre-deploy confirmation items about production state the repo cannot answer (see its dimension file).

Pruning table (deep mode)

Before spawning, the main agent prunes dimensions that cannot apply to the diff. List pruned dimensions and the one-line reason in the report header. When in doubt, run the dimension.

"Docs-only" means human-facing prose only. Files that are executable instructions for agents — .agents/skills/**, AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md, prompt templates, orchestration manuals — count as code for pruning purposes: their "prose" carries control flow, contracts, and rules whose contradictions are exactly what logic / business-logic / reuse-architecture exist to catch. A diff touching them is never docs-only.

Light mode applies the same table to decide which Quick checklists to read.

Extension packs

A wrapping repository (e.g. a private deployment that vendors this repo as a submodule) can extend the rule set without forking this skill: any sibling skill directory in the active skills root matching deep-review-* (for example .agents/skills/deep-review-cloud/) is an extension pack.

• Extension packs contain dimensions/*.md files in the same format; a file named after a built-in dimension extends it (load both), a new name adds a dimension.
• An extension file declaring extends: <name> where no such built-in dimension exists (typically because the wrapping repo pins an older submodule commit) falls back to standing on its own. Such a file must therefore carry its own id_prefix / verify / skip_when so it stays usable either way; when the built-in is present, the built-in's frontmatter wins.
• Both modes must check for extension packs at startup and load whatever is present. Absence is normal — this skill is self-sufficient.
• Extension packs may carry rules that must not live in this open-source repo; never copy their content into files under this directory.

Light mode procedure

1. Determine review scope exactly as deep mode step 0 does (see the environment manual's scope rules — three-dot diff from a base that does not lag the fork point, submodule diffs included), but skip the background-hunting extras when context already tells you what changed.
2. Apply the pruning table; read the Quick checklist section of each surviving dimension file, plus extension-pack counterparts.
3. Review inline. Findings must cite a rule source or code evidence; respect the codebase-calibration principle.
   • On a follow-up round (verifying that earlier findings were fixed), review the newly changed code as a fresh diff under the same checklists — never just confirm the requested edits landed. Fix commits introduce new logic (guards, parsers, refactors) whose bugs a checkbox pass will miss.
4. Label every finding on the same two axes deep mode uses, and let them drive the recommendation:
   • Severity — use only P0 (incident-level impact), P1 (must fix in this change), or P2 (real but deferrable). Never invent additional levels. State whether each finding blocks release.
   • Introduced or pre-existing — if the problem lives in code this diff did not change, do not fix it here. Say who introduced it (git blame / git log -L on the location) and offer to file a Linear issue for that owner. The only exception is an old bug this diff makes reachable or harmful for the first time, at P0.
   • Likelihood — high / medium / low, judged on the real production path. State it next to the severity. A low-likelihood, non-blocking finding is a follow-up, not a fix-now item; on a repeat review of the same change, list it in one line and move on instead of re-arguing it.
5. Output in your environment's normal review format (light mode does NOT use the deep report template). When release-risk produced pre-deploy confirmation items, list them as a short checklist separate from the findings — they are questions about production state, not defects. Mention that deep mode exists if findings suggest the diff deserves a full pass.

Deep mode procedure

Pick the manual for the current environment and follow it end to end:

• Claude Code → references/claude-code/main.md
• Codex → references/codex/main.md

If the environment is not listed, tell the user deep mode does not support it yet and offer light mode instead. Do not improvise another environment's mechanics, and do not degrade to a single-agent pass (see principle 2).

Keeping this skill sharp

The skill-freshness dimension and the workflow_feedback channel in the subagent return schema exist to feed observations back into these files. When a review surfaces a rule gap, an outdated rule, or a recurring team preference, update the relevant dimension file in the same PR or a follow-up — that is how calibration stays current.