pr: review evaluates changes against stated intent#19
Closed
skapoor8 wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
A review should judge whether a change delivers its purpose, not just whether the code is clean. Add an INTENT ALIGNMENT dimension as the first thing review checks: read the PR/MR title and description as the stated intent, trace the headline use case end-to-end, and flag anything that undercuts it — a main path that stalls, an abstraction that never connects, a "reusable" thing that isn't — as BLOCKING even when the code is well-formed. The summary now leads with an intent verdict.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Changes
Reviews now judge whether a change delivers its stated intent, not just code quality.
review.md: add an INTENT ALIGNMENT dimension, evaluated first. Read the PR/MR title + description as the stated goal, trace the headline use case end-to-end, and flag anything that undercuts it — a main path that stalls, an abstraction that never connects to its consumer, a "reusable/global/automatic" thing that isn't — asBLOCKING, even when the code is clean.Motivation: a recent review passed a diff on code quality but missed that the feature's headline use case wouldn't actually work. This makes that failure mode a first-class check.
Validation
mise run skills:validate— 0 failedmise run docs:build— cleanFuture Work