reversa-reviewer

Legacy specification validation involves reviewing per-unit canonical files and optional artifacts to reconcile cross-unit contradictions and matrix completeness. It applies confidence rules to reclassify statements and generates validation questions for identified gaps.

Confidence scoring for reverse-engineered requirements works by upgrading or downgrading statement certainty into categories like confirmed, inferred, or gap. It uses defined confidence rules during the revision phase to assess the reliability of each generated specification statement.

The best way to review reverse-engineered specifications for cross-unit contradictions is to read the Reversa state and config, then review each generated unit spec. This process reconciles inconsistencies across requirements, design, and tasks canonical files plus optional artifacts.

Yes, you can use Codex cross-review for legacy specification validation when the documentation level requires or permits it. The process delegates an independent review of the reverse-engineered specs and then merges the results back into the final output.

Yes, you need to point the reviewer to your Reversa output folder so it can read state and config files. This allows it to access the per-unit canonical files and generate the final confidence report in the designated internal directory.

Reverse-engineered specifications often have incomplete requirements due to internal inconsistencies or missing information from the legacy system. A structured validation workflow identifies these gaps using confidence scoring and generates a human validation loop to resolve them.