review — judgement router

Home branch in Memora: root/skill/review.

Boundary: client patches are out of scope — a retired patch set is not startup work, and patch history is read-only diagnosis when the owner asks for it. This router evaluates artifacts and claims; it does not revive client patches.

Removed 2026-09-19 by owner order: rejudge, rejudge-diff, cross-eval (external LLM validation APIs). Answer 593 (2026-10-18) closed the last exception: there is no "second opinion per run" any more — every review is verified locally.

Choosing a part

Situation	Part
Technical code review / bug findings	Local code-review method below; matching security parts for security depth
Where the canonical truth on a question lives	parts/relevance-scan/
Pressure-test a product/business idea ("roast it")	parts/roast/; simulated perspectives are not independent evidence
Challenge an assumption or plan adversarially	parts/challenge/
Check work from a human user's perspective	parts/think-like-human/; parts/human-review/ for interactive preview
Reflect on what went wrong / right after a task	parts/self-reflection/, parts/reflect/
Extract lessons into memory after outcomes	parts/self-learning/
Verify claimed work and delivery hygiene	parts/verify/
Debug a reported bug systematically	parts/diagnosing-bugs/

Seven parts, all kept; load only the ones the task needs.

Rules

• Output shape: a compact prioritized list. Each material finding gets file:line, the triggering scenario, the observed or source-traced cause, the impact and the suggested repair. No scores, no invented issues, no guaranteed-count quotas.
• Local evidence only. Tests, typecheck, targeted probes, reading the callers. No external reviewer API or proxy, no "confirm with another model". A suspicion stays a hypothesis until supported; severity follows actual consequences.
• Forks go to ask_questions: a material architecture or product change, conflicting requirements, a check that cannot run. Ordinary verified defects in scope are fixed and re-tested without a per-finding ceremony.
• Lessons land in Memora under root/skill/review as a node with outcome and a link to the incident — not in a flat log file.
• Review-only means findings, not automatic implementation. A clean bounded review does not certify the whole system.
• Read the method and the referenced executable source before relying on its tools; historical host paths and slash commands are not proof of capability.

Related

dev (verification-before-completion, systematic-debugging), challenge, security, task-cycle.