mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-08-31 10:20:42 +02:00
feat(review): simplification specialist — advisory over-engineering lens with ponytail's tag vocabulary
New 8th Review Army specialist (DIFF_LINES > 100, --simplification force flag) hunting unrequested STRUCTURE only: delete/stdlib/native/speculative/shrink closed tags, one-line findings, lines_removable field. speculative: replaces ponytail's yagni: tag — we import the lens, not the posture; coverage stays sacred (Completeness Gaps owns it, suppressions inlined, shrink needs >=5 lines). Advisory carve-out in the merge step: advisory findings are excluded from quality_score and the findings-count header, render with an [ADVISORY] label, and are ASK-only in Fix-First. Zero-findings case prints the lens-scoped 'Simplification: lean already — nothing to cut.' from the PARENT (the specialist keeps the exact NO FINDINGS contract); with findings, the parent prints 'net: -N lines possible' summed from lines_removable. Tests: static pins for the carve-out + early-out contract (gen-skill-docs), two periodic e2e cases with planted fixtures — activation (over-build traps: hand-rolled Intl, one-impl abstract, dead config) and false-flag precision (a lean ETHOS 'choose A' diff must yield NO FINDINGS). Inspired by dietrichgebert/ponytail's /ponytail-review. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
co-authored by
Claude Fable 5
Claude Fable 5
parent
848973007c
commit
cbb4d35792
+5
-3
@@ -7,7 +7,9 @@ Review the `git diff origin/main` output for the issues listed below. Be specifi
|
||||
**Two-pass review:**
|
||||
- **Pass 1 (CRITICAL):** Run SQL & Data Safety, Race Conditions, LLM Output Trust Boundary, Shell Injection, and Enum Completeness first. Highest severity.
|
||||
- **Pass 2 (INFORMATIONAL):** Run remaining categories below. Lower severity but still actioned.
|
||||
- **Specialist categories (handled by parallel subagents, NOT this checklist):** Test Gaps, Dead Code, Magic Numbers, Conditional Side Effects, Performance & Bundle Impact, Crypto & Entropy. See `review/specialists/` for these.
|
||||
- **Specialist categories (handled by parallel subagents, NOT this checklist):** Test Gaps, Dead Code, Magic Numbers, Conditional Side Effects, Performance & Bundle Impact, Crypto & Entropy, Simplification (unrequested structure). See `review/specialists/` for these.
|
||||
|
||||
Completeness Gaps and Simplification are orthogonal, not contradictory: Completeness pushes coverage UP (tests, edge cases, error paths), Simplification pushes unrequested structure DOWN (one-implementation abstractions, hand-rolled stdlib, dead flexibility). The same diff can legitimately receive both.
|
||||
|
||||
All findings get action via Fix-First Review: obvious mechanical fixes are applied automatically,
|
||||
genuinely ambiguous issues are batched into a single user question.
|
||||
@@ -129,8 +131,8 @@ CRITICAL (highest severity): INFORMATIONAL (main agent): SPECIALIST (p
|
||||
├─ Shell Injection ├─ LLM Prompt Issues ├─ Performance specialist
|
||||
└─ Enum & Value Completeness ├─ Completeness Gaps ├─ Data Migration specialist
|
||||
├─ Time Window Safety ├─ API Contract specialist
|
||||
├─ Type Coercion at Boundaries └─ Red Team (conditional)
|
||||
├─ View/Frontend
|
||||
├─ Type Coercion at Boundaries ├─ Simplification (advisory)
|
||||
├─ View/Frontend └─ Red Team (conditional)
|
||||
└─ Distribution & CI/CD Pipeline
|
||||
|
||||
All findings are actioned via Fix-First Review. Severity determines
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ Based on the scope signals above, select which specialists to dispatch.
|
||||
5. **Data Migration** — if SCOPE_MIGRATIONS=true. Read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/review/specialists/data-migration.md`
|
||||
6. **API Contract** — if SCOPE_API=true. Read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/review/specialists/api-contract.md`
|
||||
7. **Design** — if SCOPE_FRONTEND=true. Use the existing design review checklist at `~/.claude/skills/gstack/review/design-checklist.md`
|
||||
8. **Simplification** — if DIFF_LINES > 100. Read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/review/specialists/simplification.md`. Advisory-only lens: hunts unrequested structure (hand-rolled stdlib, one-implementation abstractions, dependencies duplicating platform features), never coverage.
|
||||
|
||||
### Adaptive gating
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -60,7 +61,7 @@ For each conditional specialist that passed scope gating, check the `gstack-spec
|
||||
- If tagged `[GATE_CANDIDATE]` (0 findings in 10+ dispatches): skip it. Print: "[specialist] auto-gated (0 findings in N reviews)."
|
||||
- If tagged `[NEVER_GATE]`: always dispatch regardless of hit rate. Security and data-migration are insurance policy specialists — they should run even when silent.
|
||||
|
||||
**Force flags:** If the user's prompt includes `--security`, `--performance`, `--testing`, `--maintainability`, `--data-migration`, `--api-contract`, `--design`, or `--all-specialists`, force-include that specialist regardless of gating.
|
||||
**Force flags:** If the user's prompt includes `--security`, `--performance`, `--testing`, `--maintainability`, `--data-migration`, `--api-contract`, `--design`, `--simplification`, or `--all-specialists`, force-include that specialist regardless of gating.
|
||||
|
||||
Note which specialists were selected, gated, and skipped. Print the selection:
|
||||
"Dispatching N specialists: [names]. Skipped: [names] (scope not detected). Gated: [names] (0 findings in N+ reviews)."
|
||||
@@ -145,8 +146,14 @@ Group findings by fingerprint. For findings sharing the same fingerprint:
|
||||
- Confidence 3-4: move to appendix (suppress from main findings)
|
||||
- Confidence 1-2: suppress entirely
|
||||
|
||||
**Advisory carve-out (simplification specialist):**
|
||||
Findings with `"advisory": true` are excluded from BOTH the quality_score
|
||||
summation and the findings-count header below — they are structure suggestions,
|
||||
not defects, and must not make "5 findings … 10/10" look contradictory. In
|
||||
Fix-First they are ASK-only: NEVER auto-applied, even when mechanical.
|
||||
|
||||
**Compute PR Quality Score:**
|
||||
After merging, compute the quality score:
|
||||
After merging, compute the quality score over NON-advisory findings only:
|
||||
`quality_score = max(0, 10 - (critical_count * 2 + informational_count * 0.5))`
|
||||
Cap at 10. Log this in the review result at the end.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -156,7 +163,8 @@ Present the merged findings in the same format as the current review:
|
||||
```
|
||||
SPECIALIST REVIEW: N findings (X critical, Y informational) from Z specialists
|
||||
|
||||
[For each finding, in order: CRITICAL first, then INFORMATIONAL, sorted by confidence descending]
|
||||
[For each finding, in order: CRITICAL first, then INFORMATIONAL, sorted by confidence descending;
|
||||
advisory findings last, each rendered with an [ADVISORY] label in place of the severity]
|
||||
[SEVERITY] (confidence: N/10, specialist: name) path:line — summary
|
||||
Fix: recommended fix
|
||||
[If MULTI-SPECIALIST CONFIRMED: show confirmation note]
|
||||
@@ -164,12 +172,20 @@ SPECIALIST REVIEW: N findings (X critical, Y informational) from Z specialists
|
||||
PR Quality Score: X/10
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Simplification footer (after the score line):**
|
||||
- If the simplification specialist was dispatched and returned findings, sum
|
||||
their `lines_removable` values and print: `net: -N lines possible` (omit
|
||||
findings without the field from the sum).
|
||||
- If it was dispatched and returned NO FINDINGS, print:
|
||||
`Simplification: lean already — nothing to cut.`
|
||||
- If it was not dispatched, print neither line.
|
||||
|
||||
These findings flow into Step 5 Fix-First alongside the CRITICAL pass findings from Step 4.
|
||||
The Fix-First heuristic applies identically — specialist findings follow the same AUTO-FIX vs ASK classification.
|
||||
The Fix-First heuristic applies identically — specialist findings follow the same AUTO-FIX vs ASK classification (except advisory findings, which are ASK-only per the carve-out above).
|
||||
|
||||
**Compile per-specialist stats:**
|
||||
After merging findings, compile a `specialists` object for the review-log entry in Step 5.8.
|
||||
For each specialist (testing, maintainability, security, performance, data-migration, api-contract, design, red-team):
|
||||
For each specialist (testing, maintainability, security, performance, data-migration, api-contract, design, simplification, red-team):
|
||||
- If dispatched: `{"dispatched": true, "findings": N, "critical": N, "informational": N}`
|
||||
- If skipped by scope: `{"dispatched": false, "reason": "scope"}`
|
||||
- If skipped by gating: `{"dispatched": false, "reason": "gated"}`
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
|
||||
# Simplification Specialist Review Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Scope: Conditional (DIFF_LINES > 100). This lens hunts unrequested *structure* only: abstractions with one implementation, hand-rolled stdlib, dependencies duplicating platform features, dead flexibility. Coverage gaps are out of scope — the Completeness Gaps checklist category owns those. Never flag a test, an error path, or an edge-case branch for deletion.
|
||||
Output: JSON objects, one finding per line. Schema:
|
||||
{"severity":"INFORMATIONAL","confidence":N,"path":"file","line":N,"category":"delete|stdlib|native|speculative|shrink","summary":"...","fix":"...","lines_removable":N,"advisory":true,"fingerprint":"path:line:category","specialist":"simplification"}
|
||||
Required: severity (always INFORMATIONAL), confidence, path, category, summary, advisory (always true), specialist.
|
||||
Optional: line, fix, fingerprint, evidence, lines_removable (the net lines deleted if the fix is applied — the merge step sums this for the `net:` footer).
|
||||
If no findings: output `NO FINDINGS` and nothing else.
|
||||
|
||||
Findings from this specialist are ADVISORY: they are excluded from the PR Quality Score and are never auto-applied by Fix-First — the merge step handles both carve-outs.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## The five tags (closed vocabulary — every finding uses exactly one as its `category`)
|
||||
|
||||
- `delete:` dead code, unused flexibility, speculative feature. Replacement: nothing.
|
||||
- `stdlib:` hand-rolled thing the standard library ships. Name the function.
|
||||
- `native:` dependency or code doing what the platform already does. Name the feature.
|
||||
- `speculative:` abstraction with one implementation, config nobody sets, layer with one caller.
|
||||
- `shrink:` same logic, fewer lines — only when the reduction is ≥5 lines. Show the shorter form.
|
||||
|
||||
## Finding style — one line each, location + what to cut + what replaces it
|
||||
|
||||
❌ "This EmailValidator class might be more complex than necessary, have you
|
||||
considered whether all these validation rules are needed at this stage?"
|
||||
|
||||
✅ `{"severity":"INFORMATIONAL","confidence":8,"path":"lib/email.ts","line":12,"category":"stdlib","summary":"27-line validator class — '@' in email covers it; real validation is the confirmation mail","fix":"replace class with a one-line includes('@') check","lines_removable":26,"advisory":true,"specialist":"simplification"}`
|
||||
|
||||
✅ `{"severity":"INFORMATIONAL","confidence":9,"path":"app/dates.ts","line":4,"category":"native","summary":"moment.js imported for one format call","fix":"Intl.DateTimeFormat, 0 deps","lines_removable":3,"advisory":true,"specialist":"simplification"}`
|
||||
|
||||
✅ `{"severity":"INFORMATIONAL","confidence":8,"path":"repo.py","line":88,"category":"speculative","summary":"AbstractRepository with one implementation","fix":"inline it until a second implementation exists","lines_removable":41,"advisory":true,"specialist":"simplification"}`
|
||||
|
||||
✅ `{"severity":"INFORMATIONAL","confidence":7,"path":"sync.ts","line":52,"category":"delete","summary":"retry wrapper around an idempotent local call","fix":"nothing replaces it","lines_removable":19,"advisory":true,"specialist":"simplification"}`
|
||||
|
||||
## What to hunt
|
||||
|
||||
- Dependencies the stdlib or platform already ships (`<input type="date">` over a picker lib, CSS over JS, DB constraint over app code)
|
||||
- Single-implementation interfaces, factories with one product, wrappers that only delegate
|
||||
- Files exporting one thing, dead flags and config, hand-rolled stdlib
|
||||
- Manual loops that a built-in expresses in one line (≥5 lines saved only)
|
||||
|
||||
## Suppressions — DO NOT flag these (inherited from the main checklist, binding here)
|
||||
|
||||
- "X is redundant with Y" when the redundancy is harmless and aids readability
|
||||
- Consistency-only changes (wrapping a value in a conditional to match how another constant is guarded)
|
||||
- Tests, error paths, edge-case branches, input validation, security measures, accessibility — NEVER deletion targets; coverage is the Completeness Gaps category's job, and the house rule is "If A is 70 lines more, choose A" (ETHOS.md)
|
||||
- A single smoke test or assert-based self-check — that is the completeness minimum, not bloat
|
||||
- Deliberate `gstack-shortcut(dec-*)` markers — already acknowledged debt with a ledger entry
|
||||
- ANYTHING already addressed in the diff you're reviewing — read the FULL diff before commenting
|
||||
@@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ Based on the scope signals above, select which specialists to dispatch.
|
||||
5. **Data Migration** — if SCOPE_MIGRATIONS=true. Read \`${ctx.paths.skillRoot}/review/specialists/data-migration.md\`
|
||||
6. **API Contract** — if SCOPE_API=true. Read \`${ctx.paths.skillRoot}/review/specialists/api-contract.md\`
|
||||
7. **Design** — if SCOPE_FRONTEND=true. Use the existing design review checklist at \`${ctx.paths.skillRoot}/review/design-checklist.md\`
|
||||
8. **Simplification** — if DIFF_LINES > 100. Read \`${ctx.paths.skillRoot}/review/specialists/simplification.md\`. Advisory-only lens: hunts unrequested structure (hand-rolled stdlib, one-implementation abstractions, dependencies duplicating platform features), never coverage.
|
||||
|
||||
### Adaptive gating
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -76,7 +77,7 @@ For each conditional specialist that passed scope gating, check the \`gstack-spe
|
||||
- If tagged \`[GATE_CANDIDATE]\` (0 findings in 10+ dispatches): skip it. Print: "[specialist] auto-gated (0 findings in N reviews)."
|
||||
- If tagged \`[NEVER_GATE]\`: always dispatch regardless of hit rate. Security and data-migration are insurance policy specialists — they should run even when silent.
|
||||
|
||||
**Force flags:** If the user's prompt includes \`--security\`, \`--performance\`, \`--testing\`, \`--maintainability\`, \`--data-migration\`, \`--api-contract\`, \`--design\`, or \`--all-specialists\`, force-include that specialist regardless of gating.
|
||||
**Force flags:** If the user's prompt includes \`--security\`, \`--performance\`, \`--testing\`, \`--maintainability\`, \`--data-migration\`, \`--api-contract\`, \`--design\`, \`--simplification\`, or \`--all-specialists\`, force-include that specialist regardless of gating.
|
||||
|
||||
Note which specialists were selected, gated, and skipped. Print the selection:
|
||||
"Dispatching N specialists: [names]. Skipped: [names] (scope not detected). Gated: [names] (0 findings in N+ reviews)."`;
|
||||
@@ -167,8 +168,14 @@ Group findings by fingerprint. For findings sharing the same fingerprint:
|
||||
- Confidence 3-4: move to appendix (suppress from main findings)
|
||||
- Confidence 1-2: suppress entirely
|
||||
|
||||
**Advisory carve-out (simplification specialist):**
|
||||
Findings with \`"advisory": true\` are excluded from BOTH the quality_score
|
||||
summation and the findings-count header below — they are structure suggestions,
|
||||
not defects, and must not make "5 findings … 10/10" look contradictory. In
|
||||
Fix-First they are ASK-only: NEVER auto-applied, even when mechanical.
|
||||
|
||||
**Compute PR Quality Score:**
|
||||
After merging, compute the quality score:
|
||||
After merging, compute the quality score over NON-advisory findings only:
|
||||
\`quality_score = max(0, 10 - (critical_count * 2 + informational_count * 0.5))\`
|
||||
Cap at 10. Log this in the review result at the end.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -178,7 +185,8 @@ Present the merged findings in the same format as the current review:
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
SPECIALIST REVIEW: N findings (X critical, Y informational) from Z specialists
|
||||
|
||||
[For each finding, in order: CRITICAL first, then INFORMATIONAL, sorted by confidence descending]
|
||||
[For each finding, in order: CRITICAL first, then INFORMATIONAL, sorted by confidence descending;
|
||||
advisory findings last, each rendered with an [ADVISORY] label in place of the severity]
|
||||
[SEVERITY] (confidence: N/10, specialist: name) path:line — summary
|
||||
Fix: recommended fix
|
||||
[If MULTI-SPECIALIST CONFIRMED: show confirmation note]
|
||||
@@ -186,12 +194,20 @@ SPECIALIST REVIEW: N findings (X critical, Y informational) from Z specialists
|
||||
PR Quality Score: X/10
|
||||
\`\`\`
|
||||
|
||||
**Simplification footer (after the score line):**
|
||||
- If the simplification specialist was dispatched and returned findings, sum
|
||||
their \`lines_removable\` values and print: \`net: -N lines possible\` (omit
|
||||
findings without the field from the sum).
|
||||
- If it was dispatched and returned NO FINDINGS, print:
|
||||
\`Simplification: lean already — nothing to cut.\`
|
||||
- If it was not dispatched, print neither line.
|
||||
|
||||
These findings flow into ${fixFirstRef} alongside ${critPassRef}.
|
||||
The Fix-First heuristic applies identically — specialist findings follow the same AUTO-FIX vs ASK classification.
|
||||
The Fix-First heuristic applies identically — specialist findings follow the same AUTO-FIX vs ASK classification (except advisory findings, which are ASK-only per the carve-out above).
|
||||
|
||||
**Compile per-specialist stats:**
|
||||
After merging findings, compile a \`specialists\` object for ${persistRef}.
|
||||
For each specialist (testing, maintainability, security, performance, data-migration, api-contract, design, red-team):
|
||||
For each specialist (testing, maintainability, security, performance, data-migration, api-contract, design, simplification, red-team):
|
||||
- If dispatched: \`{"dispatched": true, "findings": N, "critical": N, "informational": N}\`
|
||||
- If skipped by scope: \`{"dispatched": false, "reason": "scope"}\`
|
||||
- If skipped by gating: \`{"dispatched": false, "reason": "gated"}\`
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -183,6 +183,7 @@ Based on the scope signals above, select which specialists to dispatch.
|
||||
5. **Data Migration** — if SCOPE_MIGRATIONS=true. Read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/review/specialists/data-migration.md`
|
||||
6. **API Contract** — if SCOPE_API=true. Read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/review/specialists/api-contract.md`
|
||||
7. **Design** — if SCOPE_FRONTEND=true. Use the existing design review checklist at `~/.claude/skills/gstack/review/design-checklist.md`
|
||||
8. **Simplification** — if DIFF_LINES > 100. Read `~/.claude/skills/gstack/review/specialists/simplification.md`. Advisory-only lens: hunts unrequested structure (hand-rolled stdlib, one-implementation abstractions, dependencies duplicating platform features), never coverage.
|
||||
|
||||
### Adaptive gating
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -192,7 +193,7 @@ For each conditional specialist that passed scope gating, check the `gstack-spec
|
||||
- If tagged `[GATE_CANDIDATE]` (0 findings in 10+ dispatches): skip it. Print: "[specialist] auto-gated (0 findings in N reviews)."
|
||||
- If tagged `[NEVER_GATE]`: always dispatch regardless of hit rate. Security and data-migration are insurance policy specialists — they should run even when silent.
|
||||
|
||||
**Force flags:** If the user's prompt includes `--security`, `--performance`, `--testing`, `--maintainability`, `--data-migration`, `--api-contract`, `--design`, or `--all-specialists`, force-include that specialist regardless of gating.
|
||||
**Force flags:** If the user's prompt includes `--security`, `--performance`, `--testing`, `--maintainability`, `--data-migration`, `--api-contract`, `--design`, `--simplification`, or `--all-specialists`, force-include that specialist regardless of gating.
|
||||
|
||||
Note which specialists were selected, gated, and skipped. Print the selection:
|
||||
"Dispatching N specialists: [names]. Skipped: [names] (scope not detected). Gated: [names] (0 findings in N+ reviews)."
|
||||
@@ -277,8 +278,14 @@ Group findings by fingerprint. For findings sharing the same fingerprint:
|
||||
- Confidence 3-4: move to appendix (suppress from main findings)
|
||||
- Confidence 1-2: suppress entirely
|
||||
|
||||
**Advisory carve-out (simplification specialist):**
|
||||
Findings with `"advisory": true` are excluded from BOTH the quality_score
|
||||
summation and the findings-count header below — they are structure suggestions,
|
||||
not defects, and must not make "5 findings … 10/10" look contradictory. In
|
||||
Fix-First they are ASK-only: NEVER auto-applied, even when mechanical.
|
||||
|
||||
**Compute PR Quality Score:**
|
||||
After merging, compute the quality score:
|
||||
After merging, compute the quality score over NON-advisory findings only:
|
||||
`quality_score = max(0, 10 - (critical_count * 2 + informational_count * 0.5))`
|
||||
Cap at 10. Log this in the review result at the end.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -288,7 +295,8 @@ Present the merged findings in the same format as the current review:
|
||||
```
|
||||
SPECIALIST REVIEW: N findings (X critical, Y informational) from Z specialists
|
||||
|
||||
[For each finding, in order: CRITICAL first, then INFORMATIONAL, sorted by confidence descending]
|
||||
[For each finding, in order: CRITICAL first, then INFORMATIONAL, sorted by confidence descending;
|
||||
advisory findings last, each rendered with an [ADVISORY] label in place of the severity]
|
||||
[SEVERITY] (confidence: N/10, specialist: name) path:line — summary
|
||||
Fix: recommended fix
|
||||
[If MULTI-SPECIALIST CONFIRMED: show confirmation note]
|
||||
@@ -296,12 +304,20 @@ SPECIALIST REVIEW: N findings (X critical, Y informational) from Z specialists
|
||||
PR Quality Score: X/10
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Simplification footer (after the score line):**
|
||||
- If the simplification specialist was dispatched and returned findings, sum
|
||||
their `lines_removable` values and print: `net: -N lines possible` (omit
|
||||
findings without the field from the sum).
|
||||
- If it was dispatched and returned NO FINDINGS, print:
|
||||
`Simplification: lean already — nothing to cut.`
|
||||
- If it was not dispatched, print neither line.
|
||||
|
||||
These findings flow into the Fix-First flow (item 4) alongside the checklist pass (Step 9).
|
||||
The Fix-First heuristic applies identically — specialist findings follow the same AUTO-FIX vs ASK classification.
|
||||
The Fix-First heuristic applies identically — specialist findings follow the same AUTO-FIX vs ASK classification (except advisory findings, which are ASK-only per the carve-out above).
|
||||
|
||||
**Compile per-specialist stats:**
|
||||
After merging findings, compile a `specialists` object for the review-log persist.
|
||||
For each specialist (testing, maintainability, security, performance, data-migration, api-contract, design, red-team):
|
||||
For each specialist (testing, maintainability, security, performance, data-migration, api-contract, design, simplification, red-team):
|
||||
- If dispatched: `{"dispatched": true, "findings": N, "critical": N, "informational": N}`
|
||||
- If skipped by scope: `{"dispatched": false, "reason": "scope"}`
|
||||
- If skipped by gating: `{"dispatched": false, "reason": "gated"}`
|
||||
|
||||
+28
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
|
||||
// Lean-and-complete fixture: the false-flag precision case for the
|
||||
// simplification specialist. This is an ETHOS "choose A" diff — small,
|
||||
// covers the error path and edge cases, carries its own check. There is
|
||||
// nothing here to cut; a correct simplification pass returns NO FINDINGS.
|
||||
|
||||
function parsePort(value) {
|
||||
if (value === null || value === undefined || value === '') {
|
||||
throw new Error(`parsePort: missing value`);
|
||||
}
|
||||
const port = Number(value);
|
||||
if (!Number.isInteger(port) || port < 1 || port > 65535) {
|
||||
throw new Error(`parsePort: expected integer in 1-65535, got ${JSON.stringify(value)}`);
|
||||
}
|
||||
return port;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Self-check: the smallest thing that fails if the logic breaks.
|
||||
function testParsePort() {
|
||||
const assert = require('node:assert');
|
||||
assert.strictEqual(parsePort('8080'), 8080);
|
||||
assert.strictEqual(parsePort(443), 443);
|
||||
assert.throws(() => parsePort(''), /missing value/);
|
||||
assert.throws(() => parsePort('0'), /1-65535/);
|
||||
assert.throws(() => parsePort('65536'), /1-65535/);
|
||||
assert.throws(() => parsePort('abc'), /1-65535/);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
module.exports = { parsePort, testParsePort };
|
||||
+68
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
|
||||
// Planted over-engineering fixture for the simplification specialist.
|
||||
// Three deliberate invitations: a hand-rolled date formatter the platform
|
||||
// ships (native:), an abstract layer with exactly one implementation
|
||||
// (speculative:), and a config block nothing reads (delete:).
|
||||
|
||||
// INVITATION 1 (native:): Intl.DateTimeFormat does all of this in one line.
|
||||
class DateFormatter {
|
||||
constructor(locale) {
|
||||
this.locale = locale || 'en-US';
|
||||
this.monthNames = [
|
||||
'January', 'February', 'March', 'April', 'May', 'June',
|
||||
'July', 'August', 'September', 'October', 'November', 'December',
|
||||
];
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
pad(n) {
|
||||
return n < 10 ? '0' + n : String(n);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
formatLong(date) {
|
||||
const month = this.monthNames[date.getMonth()];
|
||||
return `${month} ${date.getDate()}, ${date.getFullYear()}`;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
formatShort(date) {
|
||||
return `${this.pad(date.getMonth() + 1)}/${this.pad(date.getDate())}/${date.getFullYear()}`;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
formatTime(date) {
|
||||
const hours = date.getHours() % 12 || 12;
|
||||
const suffix = date.getHours() >= 12 ? 'PM' : 'AM';
|
||||
return `${hours}:${this.pad(date.getMinutes())} ${suffix}`;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// INVITATION 2 (speculative:): abstract base with a single implementation.
|
||||
class AbstractItemStore {
|
||||
save(item) {
|
||||
throw new Error('not implemented');
|
||||
}
|
||||
load(id) {
|
||||
throw new Error('not implemented');
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
class MemoryItemStore extends AbstractItemStore {
|
||||
constructor() {
|
||||
super();
|
||||
this.items = new Map();
|
||||
}
|
||||
save(item) {
|
||||
this.items.set(item.id, item);
|
||||
return item;
|
||||
}
|
||||
load(id) {
|
||||
return this.items.get(id) || null;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// INVITATION 3 (delete:): configuration nothing in this file (or repo) reads.
|
||||
const FORMATTER_CONFIG = {
|
||||
enableLegacyMode: false,
|
||||
cacheSize: 128,
|
||||
strictParsing: true,
|
||||
fallbackLocale: 'en-GB',
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
module.exports = { DateFormatter, MemoryItemStore, FORMATTER_CONFIG };
|
||||
@@ -943,6 +943,7 @@ describe('TEST_COVERAGE_AUDIT placeholders', () => {
|
||||
'performance.md',
|
||||
'data-migration.md',
|
||||
'api-contract.md',
|
||||
'simplification.md',
|
||||
'red-team.md',
|
||||
];
|
||||
for (const f of expected) {
|
||||
@@ -950,6 +951,32 @@ describe('TEST_COVERAGE_AUDIT placeholders', () => {
|
||||
}
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
// Regression pins for the simplification specialist (advisory carve-out edits
|
||||
// the pre-existing quality_score instruction, so the rendered contract is
|
||||
// pinned statically — the carve-out and the early-out line must both survive
|
||||
// regeneration verbatim).
|
||||
test('simplification advisory carve-out and early-out render into review docs', () => {
|
||||
const reviewArmySection = fs.readFileSync(
|
||||
path.join(ROOT, 'review', 'sections', 'review-army.md'),
|
||||
'utf-8',
|
||||
);
|
||||
expect(reviewArmySection).toContain('"advisory": true');
|
||||
expect(reviewArmySection).toContain('quality score over NON-advisory findings only');
|
||||
expect(reviewArmySection).toContain('Simplification: lean already — nothing to cut.');
|
||||
expect(reviewArmySection).toContain('net: -N lines possible');
|
||||
expect(reviewArmySection).toContain('--simplification');
|
||||
// The specialist itself must never carry a verdict-shaped zero-findings line.
|
||||
const spec = fs.readFileSync(
|
||||
path.join(ROOT, 'review', 'specialists', 'simplification.md'),
|
||||
'utf-8',
|
||||
);
|
||||
expect(spec).toContain('NO FINDINGS');
|
||||
expect(spec).not.toContain('Lean already. Ship.');
|
||||
// Closed tag vocabulary: the disavowed yagni: frame must not appear.
|
||||
expect(spec).toContain('speculative');
|
||||
expect(spec.toLowerCase()).not.toContain('"yagni"');
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
test('each specialist file has standard header with scope and output format', () => {
|
||||
const specDir = path.join(ROOT, 'review', 'specialists');
|
||||
const files = fs.readdirSync(specDir).filter(f => f.endsWith('.md'));
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -66,6 +66,8 @@ export const E2E_TOUCHFILES: Record<string, string[]> = {
|
||||
'review-army-quality-score': ['review/**', 'scripts/resolvers/review-army.ts'],
|
||||
'review-army-json-findings': ['review/**', 'scripts/resolvers/review-army.ts'],
|
||||
'review-army-red-team': ['review/**', 'scripts/resolvers/review-army.ts'],
|
||||
'review-army-simplification': ['review/**', 'scripts/resolvers/review-army.ts'],
|
||||
'review-army-simplification-precision': ['review/**', 'scripts/resolvers/review-army.ts'],
|
||||
'review-army-consensus': ['review/**', 'scripts/resolvers/review-army.ts'],
|
||||
|
||||
// Office Hours
|
||||
@@ -489,6 +491,8 @@ export const E2E_TIERS: Record<string, 'gate' | 'periodic'> = {
|
||||
'review-army-json-findings': 'gate', // JSON schema compliance
|
||||
'review-army-red-team': 'periodic', // Multi-agent coordination
|
||||
'review-army-consensus': 'periodic', // Multi-specialist agreement
|
||||
'review-army-simplification': 'periodic', // Advisory lens quality benchmark
|
||||
'review-army-simplification-precision': 'periodic', // False-flag noise benchmark
|
||||
|
||||
// Office Hours
|
||||
'office-hours-spec-review': 'gate',
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -588,6 +588,131 @@ Write findings to ${dir}/review-output.md`,
|
||||
}, 210_000);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
// --- Review Army: Simplification specialist (activation) ---
|
||||
|
||||
describeIfSelected('Review Army: Simplification activation', ['review-army-simplification'], () => {
|
||||
let dir: string;
|
||||
|
||||
beforeAll(() => {
|
||||
const repo = setupRepo('army-simplification');
|
||||
dir = repo.dir;
|
||||
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(path.join(dir, 'app.js'), '// base\n');
|
||||
repo.run('git', ['add', '.']);
|
||||
repo.run('git', ['commit', '-m', 'initial']);
|
||||
|
||||
repo.run('git', ['checkout', '-b', 'feature/date-utils']);
|
||||
const overbuild = fs.readFileSync(
|
||||
path.join(ROOT, 'test', 'fixtures', 'review-army-overbuild.js'), 'utf-8'
|
||||
);
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(path.join(dir, 'date_utils.js'), overbuild);
|
||||
repo.run('git', ['add', '.']);
|
||||
repo.run('git', ['commit', '-m', 'add date utils']);
|
||||
|
||||
copyReviewFiles(dir);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
afterAll(() => { try { fs.rmSync(dir, { recursive: true, force: true }); } catch {} });
|
||||
|
||||
testConcurrentIfSelected('review-army-simplification', async () => {
|
||||
const result = await runSkillTest({
|
||||
prompt: `You are in a git repo on a feature branch that adds a JS utility file.
|
||||
Read review-SKILL.md for instructions. Also read review-checklist.md.
|
||||
The specialist checklists are in review-specialists/ (testing.md, simplification.md, etc.).
|
||||
|
||||
Skip the preamble, lake intro, telemetry sections.
|
||||
Run Step 4.5 (Review Army) only.
|
||||
The base branch is main. The diff is over 100 lines, so the Simplification specialist should activate.
|
||||
|
||||
For the specialist dispatch, read review-specialists/simplification.md and apply it against the diff.
|
||||
|
||||
Write your findings to ${dir}/review-output.md`,
|
||||
workingDirectory: dir,
|
||||
maxTurns: 20,
|
||||
timeout: 180_000,
|
||||
testName: 'review-army-simplification',
|
||||
runId,
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
logCost('/review army simplification', result);
|
||||
recordE2E(evalCollector, '/review army simplification detection', 'Review Army', result);
|
||||
expect(result.exitReason).toBe('success');
|
||||
|
||||
const outputPath = path.join(dir, 'review-output.md');
|
||||
expect(fs.existsSync(outputPath)).toBe(true);
|
||||
const content = fs.readFileSync(outputPath, 'utf-8').toLowerCase();
|
||||
// At least one planted invitation caught, expressed through the closed
|
||||
// tag vocabulary or its obvious phrasing.
|
||||
const hasStructureFinding =
|
||||
content.includes('native') ||
|
||||
content.includes('stdlib') ||
|
||||
content.includes('speculative') ||
|
||||
content.includes('intl') ||
|
||||
content.includes('one implementation') ||
|
||||
content.includes('single implementation');
|
||||
expect(hasStructureFinding).toBe(true);
|
||||
// Advisory findings must not read as defects: the disavowed frame stays out.
|
||||
expect(content).not.toContain('lean already. ship.');
|
||||
}, 210_000);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
// --- Review Army: Simplification specialist (false-flag precision) ---
|
||||
|
||||
describeIfSelected('Review Army: Simplification precision', ['review-army-simplification-precision'], () => {
|
||||
let dir: string;
|
||||
|
||||
beforeAll(() => {
|
||||
const repo = setupRepo('army-simplification-lean');
|
||||
dir = repo.dir;
|
||||
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(path.join(dir, 'app.js'), '// base\n');
|
||||
repo.run('git', ['add', '.']);
|
||||
repo.run('git', ['commit', '-m', 'initial']);
|
||||
|
||||
repo.run('git', ['checkout', '-b', 'feature/parse-port']);
|
||||
const lean = fs.readFileSync(
|
||||
path.join(ROOT, 'test', 'fixtures', 'review-army-lean-complete.js'), 'utf-8'
|
||||
);
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(path.join(dir, 'parse_port.js'), lean);
|
||||
repo.run('git', ['add', '.']);
|
||||
repo.run('git', ['commit', '-m', 'add parsePort with self-check']);
|
||||
|
||||
copyReviewFiles(dir);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
afterAll(() => { try { fs.rmSync(dir, { recursive: true, force: true }); } catch {} });
|
||||
|
||||
testConcurrentIfSelected('review-army-simplification-precision', async () => {
|
||||
const result = await runSkillTest({
|
||||
prompt: `You are in a git repo on a feature branch that adds one small, complete utility (validation + error path + self-check).
|
||||
Read review-specialists/simplification.md and apply it against the diff of the current branch vs main (git diff main).
|
||||
|
||||
Write the specialist's raw output to ${dir}/review-output.md — either the finding JSON lines or the exact NO FINDINGS sentinel.`,
|
||||
workingDirectory: dir,
|
||||
maxTurns: 12,
|
||||
timeout: 150_000,
|
||||
testName: 'review-army-simplification-precision',
|
||||
runId,
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
logCost('/review army simplification precision', result);
|
||||
recordE2E(evalCollector, '/review army simplification precision', 'Review Army', result);
|
||||
expect(result.exitReason).toBe('success');
|
||||
|
||||
const outputPath = path.join(dir, 'review-output.md');
|
||||
expect(fs.existsSync(outputPath)).toBe(true);
|
||||
const content = fs.readFileSync(outputPath, 'utf-8');
|
||||
// Precision: a lean, complete diff yields no simplification findings.
|
||||
// The specialist must not flag the error path or the self-check for
|
||||
// deletion — that is the noise failure mode this case pins.
|
||||
const flaggedTestOrErrorPath =
|
||||
/"category"\s*:\s*"(delete|shrink|stdlib|native|speculative)"/i.test(content) &&
|
||||
/(testparseport|self-check|assert|throw)/i.test(content);
|
||||
expect(flaggedTestOrErrorPath).toBe(false);
|
||||
expect(content.toUpperCase()).toContain('NO FINDINGS');
|
||||
}, 180_000);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
// Finalize eval collector
|
||||
afterAll(async () => {
|
||||
await finalizeEvalCollector(evalCollector);
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user