gosu-review

Get a real panel review from multiple experts. Fake panels fail the skill, and so do ungrounded ones — dispatch actual subagents, and keep every finding tied to the evidence that produced it.

Target

If the user provides /gosu-review <target>, review that target. If not, review the most recent artifact in the conversation: code just edited, a plan, a skill definition, a design decision, a document, or similar. If several candidates are plausible, ask a short confirmation question before starting: Do you want me to review X? Ask only when the target is unclear.

Always show the selected target near the top of the final output. Handle loose references pragmatically: "this" or "the thing above" → most recent artifact; "this repo" or "overall" → current repository state; "the skill wording" → the relevant SKILL.md plus needed references/*. If the target is broad, continue but warn once: Wide scope: casting may be less sharp. Use /gosu-review <narrower scope> for a tighter review.

When the target is a change — a diff, a PR, uncommitted work — name it as one. Every brief then carries the defect the change claims to fix, and the change's own premise. Panelists judge a fix by whether it fixes that. Tilt two seats: one asks what else reaches the same sink as the thing being fixed; one knows the platforms, shells, or callers the change now claims to cover.

Complete when: exactly one target is named, or one confirmation question is asked and nothing else has started.

Cast

Pick 4-6 panelists for this target. Extract the target's axes first: