97d98689be
fix-test-fixture-sonnet@1, review-spec-opus@1, replan-spec-opus@1 — the dangling escalation refs from airouter-impl-*/spec-draft/feature-delivery-loop. Sonnet-authored, Opus-reviewed; review HIGH fixes applied (explicit model: opus on both opus nodes — node model: sets runtime model, composite name does not). Known gap filed in work-items epic (E1-escalation-state-gap.md): escalation edges from non-primary states 422 state_mismatch pending escalation_input_states. concept-intake@1: optional idea-elaboration pre-stage (output state idea-elaborated — not yet wired into spec-draft-opus input). All four validate against controlplane WorkflowTemplate schema.
48 lines
1.8 KiB
YAML
48 lines
1.8 KiB
YAML
name: review-spec-opus
|
|
version: 1
|
|
description: Architecture review of a spec draft, Opus (escalation from review-spec-arch-opus contract_ambiguous)
|
|
runtime: best-practices-opus-repo
|
|
input:
|
|
state: spec-draft
|
|
tags_forbidden: [security-sensitive]
|
|
required_artifacts: [spec_file]
|
|
output:
|
|
state: spec-reviewed-arch
|
|
scope_budget:
|
|
files_modified_max: 2
|
|
lines_diff_max: 150
|
|
wall_clock_seconds_max: 1800
|
|
nodes:
|
|
- id: agent
|
|
kind: agent
|
|
template: best-practices-opus-repo
|
|
model: opus
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
The agent-runtimes project repo is cloned at /workspace/project.
|
|
Change to that directory before doing any work.
|
|
|
|
The standard architecture review of this spec draft (review-spec-arch-opus, an
|
|
airouter model) reported the contract as ambiguous and could not reach a confident
|
|
PASS/REWORK verdict. You are the stronger-model escalation — review the spec draft
|
|
for the following concept and resolve the ambiguity.
|
|
|
|
**Title**: ${item.title}
|
|
|
|
**Original concept**:
|
|
${item.body}
|
|
|
|
Steps:
|
|
1. cd /workspace/project
|
|
2. Find the spec file: ls spec/ and look for a file matching the concept title slug
|
|
3. Read the spec file completely
|
|
4. Review it against architectural best practices:
|
|
- Are requirements testable and unambiguous?
|
|
- Are there security implications not addressed?
|
|
- Are interfaces and data contracts clearly and unambiguously defined (request/
|
|
response shapes, error codes, state transitions)?
|
|
- Are edge cases and failure modes covered?
|
|
5. Write your review findings to /workspace/.agent-output/review.md with a PASS or
|
|
REWORK verdict and specific findings. Explicitly resolve whatever made the
|
|
contract ambiguous on the first pass.
|
|
6. Call task_complete with "PASS" or "REWORK: <one-line reason>"
|