Reviewing a change against the workspace's standards

This skill is guidance, not a complete checklist. Verify the change's live base and head, then read the diff and enough surrounding context to understand the design before judging. A short review with one substantiated blocker beats a list of nits.

For code-facing reviews — lifecycle, concurrency, invariants, disposal, and other implementation semantics — also load the code review checklist.

Sources of truth

• The workspace's root AGENTS.md: skill authoring, validation, and quality-gate rules.
• The documentation standard (usually docs/AGENTS.md), with doc-standards for placement, structure, and budget audits.
• prose-standard: required coverage and editorial judgment.
• trim-cot-leakage and prune-prompt-pollution: reasoning-transcript and prompt-pollution smells respectively.
• The Agent Note rules (usually .agents/notes/README.md), with archive-agent-notes for supersession and archival. Treat disagreement with a note as a design discussion, not an automatic veto.
• The bilingual pairing contract and terminology table (usually docs/i18n/README.md and docs/i18n/terminology.md), with translate-docs for counterpart updates.
• setup-demon-skills: the scaffold that installs the conventions above. When a workspace lacks one, report the gap rather than inventing a standard.
• pre-push-checks: which checks cover a given diff, so the review can ask what the change should have carried before it was pushed.

Blocking requirements