What problem does it solve? AI agents produce code that is correct in a vacuum but wrong for the repo, padded with plausible-looking cruft, or quietly incomplete. Generic bug-focused reviews miss these failure modes, and self-review by the agent that wrote the code tends to rubber-stamp it. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Four ordered review passes: convention-fit against repo idioms, agent-slop signatures (over-engineering, dead code, hallucinated APIs, scope creep), requirement-completeness against the stated intent, and classic correctness including test-quality checks. - Evidence-backed findings: every finding is ranked by severity (Blocker, Should-fix, Nit), quoted from the diff, and tied to what it violates, with a mechanical verdict and a coverage note naming what was not verified. - Fresh-eyes delegation: hands the diff to a subagent with no memory of the implementation session, or clearly labels the result a self-review when no subagent is available. - Use Case: After an agent finishes a feature branch, ask for a review before opening a PR; the skill resolves the base ref via gitkit, reads the full diff including untracked files, and returns a ranked report you can optionally save to docs/reviews/ for the PR description. ## Quick Start Ask the agent to review the changes it just made on this branch before committing, and have it report findings ranked by severity.