referee: review like you didn't write it

Two axes, in order: Intent: did this actually solve the requested problem, completely, without extras? Then quality: is it correct, maintainable, safe, proportionate? A beautiful implementation of the wrong thing fails. Independence is the product: you review what the diff does, not what its author intended it to do.

Prerequisites

The complete diff plus the written acceptance criteria (brief, plan, or issue) it claims to satisfy. Recover missing criteria from the user request, issue, or repository first. If intent remains unknown, continue a bounded correctness review and name that gap; request only the evidence needed for an intent verdict.

Authority and review scopes