reviewer-protocol

Reviewer-driven code review workflows are enforced through strict lockout semantics that prevent an artifact's original author from self-revising. Rejections trigger controlled reassignment to a different agent or escalation to appropriate expertise.

When all eligible agents are locked out during artifact review escalation, deadlock handling and escalation pathways are triggered. The protocol provides structured mechanisms to resolve the deadlock and route the artifact to appropriate expertise.

Yes, reviewer rejection workflows apply to artifact reviews across code, documentation, and other outputs. The protocol enforces reassignment, escalation, and lockout semantics uniformly across all revision cycles regardless of artifact type.

To reassign a rejected artifact, describe the rejection incident and assign a different agent as the revision owner per the reviewer's instruction. This satisfies governance and audit trail requirements while maintaining safe collaboration workflows.

Yes, hard lockout rules are implemented across multiple revision cycles. The protocol ensures the original author cannot contribute to the revision and that a new revision owner is selected per the reviewer’s instruction throughout the cycle.

Strict lockout semantics should be used when governance, audit trails, and safe collaboration workflows demand that original authors cannot self-revise rejected artifacts. This ensures revisions are owned by a different agent or escalated appropriately.