CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

recipe-review

Design Doc compliance and security validation with optional auto-fixes

56

Quality

47%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/recipe-review/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Context: Post-implementation quality assurance

Orchestrator Definition

Core Identity: "I am not a worker. I am an orchestrator."

First Action: Register Steps 1-11 using TaskCreate before any execution.

Execution Method

  • Compliance validation → performed by code-reviewer
  • Security validation → performed by security-reviewer
  • Fix implementation → performed by task-executor
  • Quality checks → performed by quality-fixer
  • Re-validation → performed by code-reviewer / security-reviewer

Orchestrator invokes sub-agents and passes structured JSON between them.

Design Doc (uses most recent if omitted): $ARGUMENTS

Execution Flow

Step 1: Prerequisite Check

# Identify Design Doc
ls docs/design/*.md | grep -v template | tail -1

# Check implementation files
git diff --name-only main...HEAD

Step 2: Execute code-reviewer

Invoke code-reviewer using Agent tool:

  • subagent_type: "dev-workflows:code-reviewer"
  • description: "Code compliance review"
  • prompt: "Design Doc: [path]. Implementation files: [git diff file list]. Review mode: full. Validate Design Doc compliance and return structured JSON report with complianceRate, verdict, acceptanceCriteria, and qualityIssues."

Store output as: $STEP_2_OUTPUT

Step 3: Execute security-reviewer

Invoke security-reviewer using Agent tool:

  • subagent_type: "dev-workflows:security-reviewer"
  • description: "Security review"
  • prompt: "Design Doc: [path]. Implementation files: [git diff file list]. Review security compliance."

Store output as: $STEP_3_OUTPUT

Step 4: Verdict and Response

If security-reviewer returned blocked: Stop immediately. Report the blocked finding and escalate to user. Do not proceed to fix steps.

Code compliance criteria (considering project stage):

  • Prototype: Pass at 70%+
  • Production: 90%+ recommended

Security criteria:

  • approved or approved_with_notes → Pass
  • needs_revision → Fail

Report both results independently using subagent output fields only (do not add fields that are not in the subagent response):

Code Compliance: [complianceRate from code-reviewer]
  Verdict: [verdict from code-reviewer]
  Acceptance Criteria:
  - [fulfilled] [item]
  - [partially_fulfilled] [item]: [gap] — [suggestion]
  - [unfulfilled] [item]: [gap] — [suggestion]

Security Review: [status from security-reviewer]
  Findings by category:
  - [confirmed_risk] [location]: [description] — [rationale]
  - [defense_gap] [location]: [description] — [rationale]
  - [hardening] [location]: [description] — [rationale]
  - [policy] [location]: [description] — [rationale]
  Notes: [notes from security-reviewer, if present]

Execute fixes? (y/n):

If both pass and user selects n: Skip Steps 5-10, proceed to Step 11.

Step 5: Execute Skill

Execute Skill: documentation-criteria (for task file template)

Step 6: Create Task File

Create task file at docs/plans/tasks/review-fixes-YYYYMMDD.md Include both code compliance issues and security requiredFixes.

Step 7: Execute Fixes

Invoke task-executor using Agent tool:

  • subagent_type: "dev-workflows:task-executor"
  • description: "Execute review fixes"
  • prompt: "Task file: docs/plans/tasks/review-fixes-YYYYMMDD.md. Apply staged fixes (stops at 5 files)."

Step 8: Quality Check

Invoke quality-fixer using Agent tool:

  • subagent_type: "dev-workflows:quality-fixer"
  • description: "Quality gate check"
  • prompt: "Confirm quality gate passage for fixed files."

Step 9: Re-validate code-reviewer

Invoke code-reviewer using Agent tool:

  • subagent_type: "dev-workflows:code-reviewer"
  • description: "Re-validate compliance"
  • prompt: "Re-validate Design Doc compliance after fixes. Prior compliance issues: $STEP_2_OUTPUT. Verify each prior issue is resolved."

Step 10: Re-validate security-reviewer

Invoke security-reviewer using Agent tool (only if security fixes were applied):

  • subagent_type: "dev-workflows:security-reviewer"
  • description: "Re-validate security"
  • prompt: "Re-validate security after fixes. Prior findings: $STEP_3_OUTPUT. Design Doc: [path]. Implementation files: [file list]."

Step 11: Final Report

Code Compliance:
  Initial: [X]%
  Final: [Y]% (if fixes executed)

Security Review:
  Initial: [status]
  Final: [status] (if fixes executed)
  Notes: [notes from approved_with_notes, if any]

Remaining issues:
- [items requiring manual intervention]

Auto-fixable Items

  • Simple unimplemented acceptance criteria
  • Error handling additions
  • Contract definition fixes
  • Function splitting (length/complexity improvements)
  • Security confirmed_risk and defense_gap fixes (input validation, auth checks, output encoding)

Non-fixable Items

  • Fundamental business logic changes
  • Architecture-level modifications
  • Design Doc deficiencies
  • Committed secrets (blocked → human intervention)

Scope: Design Doc compliance validation, security review, and auto-fixes.

Repository
shinpr/claude-code-workflows
Last updated
Created

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.