A diff is not a surface. The lines a change deletes matter as much as the lines it adds, and the file it touches is rarely the whole of what it affects.

This skill owns change scope only: resolving the target, expanding changed files to affected surfaces, reading both sides of the diff, and classifying each finding. Domain rules belong to the six skills. Mode, severity, consolidation, coverage, the cap, the output format, and the verdict belong to , which this skill hands the review to. Never duplicate or override their rules here.

Correctness, tests, security, and performance belong to the project's general code review. Name the concern once and move on.

owns mode parsing; everything after the mode is the target, so is a review of pull request 482. Scope Resolution holds the accepted targets and the command for each.

With no target supplied, resolve in this order and stop at the first match:

Order matters: checking the working tree first lets one stray formatting edit shadow a twelve-commit branch while the report still claims full coverage.

Exclude lockfiles, snapshots, generated output, vendored code, and binaries, and name what you excluded. If the scope is empty after exclusions, say so and stop.

A changed file is evidence, not the review subject. Expand each one to the surfaces it renders in and review those.

Expand one hop by default: the direct importers and callers. Expand a second hop only for design tokens, theme values, and shared primitives, where one line reaches the whole product.

Review at most five consumers, ordered by the rule in Scope Resolution, and state how many you did not expand. An unbounded sweep produces coverage claims you cannot support; an unstated cutoff produces a report that looks complete and is not.

Regressions are invisible in the post-change state. Read the side of every hunk against Removed Signals.

A signal is a lead, not a finding. A removal is only a regression when nothing in the change replaces it, and the domain skill owns that judgement. Route each unmatched removal to its owner and report only what that skill confirms. Then status it , which tells the author they broke something that worked rather than made a new mistake.

Give every finding one status:

Status by what the diff touched, not by which file it sits in: a line the change never touched is even three lines from a hunk. Confirm against the base ref when it matters:

git blame -L <line>,<line> "$BASE" -- path/to/file

Hand every finding up with its status attached and let apply its cap and verdict rules.

Read the pull request title and body, the linked issue, and the commit messages, then review whether the interface delivers what they claim.

This is what surfaces the incomplete change, which a surface review cannot see because it inspects states when present and here the point is that they are absent:

Do not report scope creep. Whether a change does too much is a process question, not an interface one.

With the scope, the affected surfaces, and both sides of the diff in hand, hand the review to with the scope block and a status on every finding. It routes to the six domain skills, applies severity, consolidates, enforces the cap, and issues the verdict, including the change-scoped rules under its Change-Scoped Reviews section.

If is unavailable, report the resolved scope and the file inventory, name it as the missing skill, and stop. Do not invent a severity scale, a cap, or a verdict.

A change review is read-only, including the checkout. Fetch pull request refs; never check them out. writes only to and is permitted. , , , and rewrite the files the author has open, failing against local edits or discarding them, and are never permitted in any mode.

Rendered verification is opt-in: mark visual and runtime claims Not verified unless the project exposes a cheap preview or the user asks for a rendered review. When they do, use an isolated worktree () and remove it when done. That leaves the author's tree untouched, which a checkout does not, so a checkout is not an alternative here.

owns the format, including the four change-scoped additions under its Change-Scoped Reviews section. Follow it as written and add nothing here.

This skill supplies the scope block:

branch

working

staged

pr 482

origin/main

a1b2c3d

refs/remotes/pr/482

e4f5g6h

pnpm-lock.yaml

src/__snapshots__/

CheckoutPage

SettingsPanel

Button

Plus a status on every finding, per principle 4.

Under 's Verification, list the exact and commands and their results, including every write to (a fetch, a deepen, a , a worktree), so the read-only claim in principle 7 is auditable.