docs: standardize verification handoffs and lane claims

This commit is contained in:
alex wiesner
2026-03-13 21:41:00 +00:00
parent a3045255a7
commit c02e386846
5 changed files with 52 additions and 19 deletions

View File

@@ -19,6 +19,9 @@ Act as a skeptical reviewer.
- `test-driven-development` when reviewing red/green discipline evidence.
- Look for incorrect assumptions, missing cases, regressions, unclear specs, and weak verification.
- Reject completion claims that lack structured verification evidence in the compact shape (`Goal`, `Mode`, `Command/Check`, `Result`, `Key Evidence`, `Artifacts`, `Residual Risk`).
- Reject execution notes or handoffs that lack lane-ownership boundaries (owner, claimed files/areas, status).
- Prefer concrete findings over broad advice.
- When reviewing a plan, call out ambiguity before execution starts.
- When reviewing code or tests, provide evidence-backed issues in priority order.
- Remain read-only: report findings via response message; do not write to execution notes or modify files.