* wip(GSTA-131): review depth, fix-check transitions, dispatch counters, carry pregate, autoplan round policy Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * wip(GSTA-131): reviewers stay at full effort; audits light Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * feat(ship): Step 9 dispatches what gstack-review-plan plans; fix-check after below-floor fixes; cap two full passes plus one fix-check Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * test: review-dispatch-compare has a free lane; review-depth fixtures registered free; resumed max_rounds case off the old default Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix(GSTA-131): ship review pass-1 repairs: fix-check binds under its own skill, Step 11.5 accepts a fix-check or a planned adversarial skip, delta carry with a pregate, carry --pregate pinned to the checkout, quiet-after-cap revise regates, skill-dir markdown and rule docs classed code, gate signals from tests class up, plan fails closed on git errors, per-class compare ratios Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix(GSTA-131): ship review pass-2 repairs: Step 11 follows the last full-pass plan, Important Rules restored, ship goldens regenerated, true per-class medians, review-policy transitions and once-per-invocation voices, docs/** assets stay docs-class, CLI and fix-check binding tests Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * docs(changelog): GSTA-131 review depth, fix-check, delta /ship and autoplan rounds Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * docs: ship-policy cap and counters, review-policy /review cycle cap, unattended passes (docs audit) Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix(review): 400-word findings cap fits the /review size pins (five host pins lowered by 2); CHANGELOG max_rounds wording Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * docs(changelog): gate integrity names the size-ledger entry and the lowered /review pins Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * test: the round-budget case asserts the default through ROUNDS output only (pregate literals heuristic) Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * test: curate ship-receipt-carry-pregate out of the Windows lane like its --pregate siblings Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * docs(changelog): end the Windows curation sentence instead of a mid-sentence colon Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix(ship): one decision each for the review-loop exits, the planned adversarial skip and Step 16's TODOS rerun (screen judge repair) Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix(ship): fix-check repairs: pin the renamed Step 11 heading, keep the below-floor exit at the cap, name the plan run a repeat reuses, print the native skip on outside-only plans Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> --------- Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
19 KiB
Review policy: how gstack's reviews converge
This is the canonical statement of what a gstack review may block on, how the
/ship review loop converges, and what the ship receipt records about it. The
skills (/review, /ship) and the tools (gstack-review-scope,
gstack-ship-receipt) implement it; a team's own rules should point here
instead of restating it. A one-line crew rule is enough:
Review convergence: gstack review policy (docs/review-policy.md), scope knob default.
The blocking floor
A finding is blocking when it is a CRITICAL defect: it would fail a test,
break production, or lose data or secrets. Everything else is below the floor:
an advisory, an informational item, a test finding (category testing: a gap,
a weak or flaky test), a wording or naming note, a style or simplification
suggestion. Below-floor findings are reported, never fixed after pass 1 of a
ship, and never earn another review pass.
Three words cover every finding, and the loop budgets by them: a blocker is the intended case gone wrong (the floor above); a should is a real bug a caller will hit inside the intended case (fixed when it is in the diff on pass 1, deferred when it is not); a nit is the rest (a named note). Two stop rules follow: if a pass's fixes grew the diff past what the request needs, cut that growth first; and the cap approves nothing, so a standing blocker is reported, never waved through.
Before a merged finding counts, the parent applies lead judgment
(review/sections/review-army.md, ship/sections/review-army.md, stage 4 of
the merge): a reviewer whose whole return is nits found nothing; a defect names
the call site or input that reaches it, or it is a note; structure for a case
nothing takes is advisory; "I would have done it differently" is not a finding;
a finding that assumes a rule the repository documents otherwise is dropped with
the pointer. Independent agreement between reviewers is the strongest signal.
Every reviewer prompt gstack dispatches (the core checklist, each specialist, the Red Team, the outside voice) carries this definition: CRITICAL means the floor above; everything else is INFORMATIONAL. Data loss, a trust-boundary bypass and uncapped spend stay forced CRITICAL (the sideways sweep rule); no lane, specialist, dedup or saved decision downgrades them.
Rulings below the floor
The floor is a test, and these classes have been put to it, each more than
once, and failed it (#3485 from the /ship of #3484, #3504 from the /ship of
#3487). A finding in one of them is a note from the first pass on, named
by its ruling in the PR body's ## Review notes; it never earns a fix round
or another review pass, and the lead judgment stage drops it from the defect
count with the pointer. The floor itself does not move, so a finding that also
loses data, crosses a trust boundary or spends without a cap stays CRITICAL
whatever class it resembles.
| Ruling | What it looks like | Why it is below the floor |
|---|---|---|
| own-artifact hardening | A check missing between two things the repository's own tooling writes: a screen verdict not compared with the receipt it belongs to; a receipt schema that does not declare a key the writer records; a policy loader that defaults when the base branch's own file is invalid; a size read that follows a symlink inside the repository. | The only writer is the repository's maintainers through its tools; no caller inside the intended case reaches the gap, and no test fails. A writer outside that trust boundary makes it a bypass, and CRITICAL. |
| unwired or unread | A helper with no caller, a field written and never read, a duplicated helper, a header comment naming a step that does not run it, a key-version constant that moved before any release carried the old value. | Nothing takes the path, so nothing breaks; it is dead code to delete or wire in its own change. |
| bounded repeat work | A re-dispatch on every call, a redundant screen after main moves, an orphaned scratch branch, a refusal that could come one step earlier in the sequence, a settle that could wait one more check. | The operation completes, nothing is lost, and the cost is one more bounded run; uncapped spend is the sideways sweep's CRITICAL, not this class. |
| conservative refusal | Stale state scoped wider than its cause: a RED verdict that keeps refusing a head after main moved, a pending result that keeps refusing after it settled. | A refusal costs a rerun and never passes something wrong; a wrong pass would be the floor. |
| artifact presentation | A string from an artifact printed verbatim into a parsed line (whitespace, control characters); a classifier that reads a non-zero exit code beside a non-RED verdict as RED. | Display and classification of the repository's own output; it forges no parsed field. |
| test gap | A state-matrix cell without a test, a coverage percentage, a weak or flaky test, a fixture that shares the coordinator's environment. | Category testing, below the floor by definition above; a gap is work for the test audit, not a defect in the diff. |
A reviewer that wants a class promoted argues it against the floor with a reaching input, in the finding, and the owner rules; the table records the rulings, it does not close them.
NO FINDINGS is a result
A reviewer that finds nothing answers NO FINDINGS and nothing else. That is a
completed, clean result, never a failed review and never a reason to invent an
item to show work. Missing or unusable reviewer output is the opposite:
incomplete coverage, which blocks until the reviewer is rerun.
How /ship converges (review_scope: frozen, the default)
- Pass 1 reviews the whole diff against the merge base. Every finding goes
through
gstack-review-scope classify, which stamps it withlocus(diff: a hunk the PR changed, with three lines of context;outside: anything else),kind,blockingandscope. Findings in the diff arefix. A blocking finding in code the PR did not change isdefer:gstack-review-scope deferfiles it as a GitHub issue (one per finding, reused across reruns through an<!-- gstack-deferred-finding: <fingerprint> -->marker; the issue text is scanned like the PR body before anything is posted, so a finding that quotes a secret isunfiled (publication scan refused: …);unfiled (<reason>)whenghis unavailable or its search fails; every unfiled case still exits 0) and the PR body lists it under## Deferred findings. A finding'scause(the changed line behind a defect reported elsewhere, a deleted file included) places it in the diff. Below-floor findings outside the diff arenote, listed under## Review notes. - What comes next is the transition table below, not "any fix earns
another pass". A full pass after pass 1 reviews only the range since the
previous pass: each pass saves its head, the next diffs
RANGE_BASE..HEADfor every reviewer (the gate scan and QA probes keep the whole candidate) and classifies with--range-base. Only a blocking finding in that range or in the diff isfix; every below-floor finding is anote. - Two full passes is the cap, plus at most one fix-check. A blocking finding still open after the last allowed step stops the run and names the finding (path, severity, problem) for the owner; a third full pass is the owner's call, never the loop's. The cap approves nothing.
Transitions
gstack-review-plan (lib/review-depth.ts nextStep) owns this table, and
/ship asks it after every step:
| The step that just finished | Next |
|---|---|
| none | full pass 1 on the whole diff |
| a full pass with no edits | done |
| a full pass that fixed a blocking finding, below the cap | full pass on the range |
| a full pass whose fix touched a gate-class path, below the cap | full pass on the range |
| a full pass that fixed only below-floor findings | one fix-check |
| a full pass at the cap that fixed a blocking finding | one fix-check |
| a full pass that leaves a blocking finding open (fixed or not) | stop: name it for the owner |
| a fix-check that found nothing blocking | done |
| a fix-check that found a blocking finding | stop: name it for the owner |
A fix-check is one reviewer reading the touched hunks, the fix list, the
test results and the callers of every changed symbol, at full effort. It is
logged as a review-fix-check row, so it never counts as a pass. No army, no
Red Team and no outside voice run on it.
The same floor and the same NO FINDINGS rule apply to /review on its own;
its re-review loop keeps its three-cycle fix cap (CYCLES), and a pass that
applies no edits is its exit too.
Review depth by diff class
gstack-review-plan --base <base> classifies the diff and prints the reviewers
the next step dispatches (REVIEW_CLASS:, REVIEW_PLAN:, one DISPATCH: per
reviewer with its effort, one SKIP: per reviewer left out, --json). A mixed
diff takes its most restrictive class; a gstack-diff-scope error fails closed
to code, and code with the gate scan unavailable fails closed to gate.
| Class | What it is | Pass 1 dispatches |
|---|---|---|
| docs | markdown no agent or gate reads: README, CHANGELOG, TODOS, how-to and explanation docs | the parent's core checklist only |
| tests | test files and fixtures only | core plus the testing specialist |
| code | everything else, including every SKILL.md and template, any markdown in a skill directory, */sections/**, scripts/resolvers/**, docs/*-policy.md, docs/captain.md, docs/unattended.md, docs/pregate.md, checklists, specialists and bins |
specialists by scope (as before), the native adversarial pass, the outside voice; the Red Team past 200 lines or after a CRITICAL |
| gate | code plus auth or migration scope, a hunk the gate scan tags (an RH rule: a relaxed threshold, a skipped test), a deleted code file, CI workflows, credential or state-root paths | code's set, plus the Red Team always, at full effort, and no hit-rate gating |
Numbers keep the outside voice. On a docs or tests diff the outside voice is
skipped unless the diff publishes numeric claims: gstack-review-plan scans the
added lines of every path for percentages, money, multipliers, durations, token
or credit counts and score, rate or speed claims (NUMBERS: yes), and a
claim always dispatches it. The claims' fingerprint (fingerprint=) is passed
back as --reviewed-numbers; when a later fix changes a claim, only the
outside voice reruns, on the numbers.
The adversarial and outside voices run once per invocation (Step 11, on the
final tree), as the last full-pass plan lists them; after they ran, decision 2
passes --adversarial-ran so a repeat lists them no more. Later full passes rerun the
specialists on the range only. Step 11.5 binds a planned skip through the Step 9
record's CURRENT freshness instead of a native record.
Effort. Every reviewer that can block a ship (the core checklist,
specialists, the Red Team, the native adversarial pass, fix-checks) runs at
full effort. Work that cannot block (the Step 7 coverage audit, the Step 8
plan-completion audit, the Step 14.5 docs audit, decision-trail reviewers,
watchers) runs at light: the same model at a lower reasoning effort, never a
cheaper model family. The outside voice keeps its own provider and effort
(codex_effort). A host that cannot set a subagent's effort runs it at its
default. gstack-config set review_effort_tiers off (or --no-tiers) runs
the audits and watchers at the host default too
(model-policy.md).
What the receipt records
gstack-review-scope summary --since <REVIEW_SINCE> reads this invocation's
review-log rows and writes the counters gstack-ship-receipt write --review-loop
puts in the receipt:
| Field | Meaning |
|---|---|
review_loop.passes |
full review passes this ship ran (1 or 2; up to 3 under review_scope: all) |
review_loop.blocking_found |
distinct blocking findings across the passes |
review_loop.deferred |
blocking findings in unchanged code filed as issues (a Step 11 late defer, logged as a review-late-defer row so it never displaces the newest review pass, counts here and is not a pass) |
review_loop.noted |
below-floor findings listed in the PR body |
review_loop.fixed |
findings fixed in this PR |
review_loop.scope |
the review_scope the loop ran under |
review_loop.fix_checks |
fix-checks this ship ran (never passes) |
review_loop.dispatches |
reviewer dispatches by role: specialist, red-team, adversarial-native, outside-voice, fix-check |
review_loop.est_input_tokens |
prompt plus diff bytes the dispatches read, divided by 4: a relative estimate for comparing runs, not a bill |
Each review row may carry dispatches: [{role, effort, prompt_bytes, diff_bytes, status}]; summary adds them up (older rows fall back to the
specialist stats they record). The summary line appends fix_checks=,
dispatches= and est_input_tokens= only when they were recorded, so an old
loop prints the old line.
The receipt's summary line prints passes=<n> blocking_found=<k> deferred=<m>,
which is what a scorecard tracks (target: a median of 1 pass per PR). A
receipt carried across a base merge or a test-only fix
(ship-policy.md#receipt-carry) keeps these
counters, because the reviewed product diff is unchanged.
The scope knob
.gstack/ship-policy.json review_scope (ship-policy.md#review-scope):
| Value | Pass 1 | Blocking finding in unchanged code | Pass 2+ | Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
frozen (default) |
the diff | filed as an issue, listed as deferred | the range since the previous pass, blocking only | 2 full passes + 1 fix-check |
diff-plus-blocking |
the diff | fixed in this PR | the range since the previous pass, blocking only | 2 full passes + 1 fix-check |
all |
everything | fixed in this PR | the whole diff, every finding | 3 fix cycles |
diff-plus-blocking is the fallback for a repository where deferred issues pile
up; all is the loop as it ran before the key existed. A value other than
frozen needs min_gstack_version at or past the release that added the key
(REVIEW_SCOPE_KEY_VERSION in lib/ship-policy.ts) so an older gstack refuses
the file by name instead of ignoring the key.
Reviewer fan-out
The review army launches every selected specialist in one message so they run
in parallel; a host that caps running subagents makes that impossible past the
cap. In /ship the knob is a prompt flag, --review-fanout auto|serial|parallel
(default auto), read where the force flags (--all-specialists) are (/review
on its own keeps the single parallel batch: its generated SKILL.md sits at its
size pin, and a refused launch there is a failed reader, never dropped coverage):
| Value | Batches |
|---|---|
auto |
when the host reports fewer free subagent slots than selected specialists, batches of the free-slot count (at least one), each launched in one message, the next only after every reader of the previous one finished or is confirmed stopped; a host that reports no slot count runs one parallel batch |
serial |
batches of one |
parallel |
one batch regardless of slots; a refused launch is a failed reader, never silently dropped coverage |
Capy caps a thread at 8 running subagents, and waiting or idle ones hold a
slot, so under auto a nine-specialist review on an otherwise idle Capy
thread runs as one batch of 8 and one of 1 (Fan-out: 9 specialists in 2 batches of 8). Batching changes the order, never the set: every selected
specialist runs before the merge stage, and the Red Team's activation reads
the merged result as before.
Two checklist rules with ids
Two findings review/checklist.md names by rule id so a PR body, a review log
and a later reader agree on what was flagged:
prereg-with-results(Pass 1, Gate Integrity, ASK): one diff adds or changes an eval's preregistration (bars, arms, decoys, stop rules, a plan file) and also adds that eval's results, scores or verdict. The bar could have been set after the outcome, so the pairing is the finding. The repair is a split: the preregistration lands first and the results PR cites its merged commit.test-keyboard-count-loop(Pass 2, informational): a browser-driver test reaches an element by a counted loop of key presses and asserts on whatever has focus, so the count encodes today's DOM order. Locate the target by role, label or test id; a counted loop stays only when the count is the behavior under test.
Porting a contributor's work
A ported branch keeps the contributor's commits as theirs and adds the
porter's fixes on top, each crediting the original authors.
gstack-coauthor-trailers [<range> | --base <ref>] [--message <file>] [--exclude <email>]... lists every distinct author of the range's commits
(default origin/<base>..HEAD) other than the checkout's own committer
identity, in first-appearance order, as Co-authored-by: Name <email> lines;
--message <file> adds the ones the commit message file lacks to its trailer
block (git interpret-trailers, pinned placement, so an existing co-author
keeps attribution), matched by
email case-folded, so running it twice changes nothing. The COAUTHORS: <n> in <range> line on stderr is the receipt; --json prints { range, authors, trailers, appended }.
Where this is enforced
scripts/resolvers/review-army.ts: the floor andNO FINDINGSin every specialist and Red Team prompt (rendered intoreview/sections/review-army.mdandship/sections/review-army.md), and the lead judgment's "On record" line that turns a ruled class into a note; in/shipevery specialist and Red Team prompt it renders carries its diff base as a literal sha the parent writes in (DIFF_BASE=<diff-base>: the merge base on pass 1,RANGE_BASEfrom pass 2 on), because a reviewer is its own process and never sees the parent's shell variables; the fan-out batches above.ship/sections/review-army.mdStep 9: passes,RANGE_BASE, classify, defer, render, the cap check before any edit, the Step 11 late-defer row, scratch files under.gstack/tmp/, the cap decisions;ship/sections/adversarial.mdStep 11: the outside voice reads the same range and scopes queued fixes the same way.lib/review-depth.ts,bin/gstack-review-plan: the diff class, the transition table, the numeric-claim scan and each role's effort tier (test/review-depth.test.ts,test/review-plan-cli.test.ts).lib/review-scope.ts,bin/gstack-review-scope:classify,defer,render,summary(withfix_checks,dispatches,est_input_tokens); refusals areREVIEW_SCOPE_INPUTandREVIEW_SCOPE_RANGE(troubleshooting.md).lib/ship-policy.ts: thereview_scopekey and itsship: review_scope …consequence line.review/checklist.md:prereg-with-resultsunder Gate Integrity andtest-keyboard-count-loopunder Pass 2;bin/gstack-coauthor-trailersfor the contributor-credit trailers of a port.lib/ship-receipt-prose.ts,gstack-ship-receipt read --check-prose: the body's quoted counters against the receipt (RECEIPT_PROSE_MISMATCH, ship-policy.md).lib/ship-receipt.ts,lib/headless-artifacts.ts: thereview_loopreceipt object, its schema and the summary line.