reviewing-integrations-prior-art-survey

Reviews integrations prior-art artifacts against thirty numbered conditions and emits an approve or revise verdict.

1|1|Updated May 24, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/bm629/agent-skills --skill reviewing-integrations-prior-art-survey-bm629
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: reviewing-integrations-prior-art-survey
Source: https://github.com/bm629/agent-skills/tree/main/skills/reviewing-integrations-prior-art-survey
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/bm629/agent-skills --skill reviewing-integrations-prior-art-survey-bm629

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve? An agent that authors an integrations prior-art survey cannot be trusted to grade its own work, and a deterministic validator can only check structure — not whether a locator host really belongs to the vendor, whether an evidence quote supports its claim, or whether a classification was faithfully transcribed. This Skill is the human-judgement half of a two-part gate that reviews integration vocabulary maps, angle search outputs, extract records, and the integration register before they are accepted. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Thirty numbered review conditions: Judges vendor-host resolution, authority bands, verbatim query and quote fidelity, enumerated-versus-bounded zeros, admission tests, complexity component weights, lens denominators, and absence-claim phrasing — each finding tied to a named condition. - Thirteen-source evidence protocol: Reads the artifact alongside the producer package's schemas, source registry, angle references, absent-input policy, category vocabulary, extraction and synthesis guides, and the scope the producer was handed. - Single verdict output: Emits exactly one line — VERDICT: approve or VERDICT: revise — with every revise finding naming its condition, and explicitly refuses to false-revise honest small results. - Use Case: After running the integrations-prior-art-survey producer on a new product scope, run this reviewer on the resulting integration register to catch a fabricated classification or an inflated first-party authority band before the register drives build prioritization. ## Quick Start Use reviewing-integrations-prior-art-survey to review the integration register and report in my survey output directory and give me the verdict with findings.

Frequently Asked Questions about reviewing-integrations-prior-art-survey

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I review an integrations prior-art survey artifact?

Run this reviewer after the deterministic gate passes, pointing it at the artifact plus the vocabulary map, scope, and producer package references. It judges thirty numbered conditions and emits a single VERDICT: approve or VERDICT: revise line with findings tied to conditions.

What does this reviewer check that a schema validator cannot?

It judges truth rather than shape: whether a locator host really is the vendor's own, whether an evidence quote supports its claim, whether an authority band matches the page fetched, and whether meta.classification faithfully transcribes the scope. These require fetching and cross-referencing, which a gate cannot do.

Can this reviewer run without the deterministic gate?

No. A clean gate run is an explicit precondition — the skill instructs the reviewer to say so and stop if the gate did not run. Conditions deliberately avoid re-checking rules the validator already owns, so findings raised against enforced rules are treated as noise.

What evidence sources does the review require?

Thirteen sources: the artifact, the vocabulary map, the handed scope and classification, the producer's JSON schemas, source-registry.yaml, absent-input policy, category vocabulary, angle references, vocabulary-map guide, the frozen extract queue and records, and the extraction, synthesis-lenses, and report guides.

When should a small survey result be approved rather than revised?

When the coverage grid is complete, causes are observable, and admissions are justified, a small result — three candidates, an enumerated zero, a vacated angle — is correct and must be approved. Condition C18 explicitly forbids findings whose substance is that the result seems thin.