ship

Combines REVIEWER (adversarial code review) and DOCUMENTER (commit, complete, reflect). </overview>

YOU CANNOT SKIP ANY OF THESE for APPROVE or CONDITIONAL outcomes. If REJECT, stop after review, set frontmatter to phase: rework, and return to /apex:implement. </mandatory-actions>

You can find active tasks in ./apex/tasks/ or run with: /apex:ship [identifier] </if-no-arguments> <if-arguments>Load task file and begin review.</if-arguments> </initial-response>

Contract rules:

• •Final report MUST map changes to AC-* and confirm no out-of-scope work
• •If scope/ACs changed during implement, ensure amendments are recorded with rationale and version bump </instructions>

Review for security vulnerabilities. Return YAML with id, severity, confidence, location, issue, evidence, mitigations_found. </agent>

Review for performance issues. Return YAML findings. </agent>

Review for architecture violations and pattern consistency. Return YAML findings. </agent>

Review for test coverage gaps. Return YAML findings. </agent>

Review for maintainability and code quality. Return YAML findings. </agent>

<wait-for-all>WAIT for ALL 5 agents to complete before Phase 2.</wait-for-all> </step>

Challenge EVERY finding for:

• •Code accuracy (did Phase 1 read correctly?)
• •Pattern applicability (does framework prevent this?)
• •Evidence quality (Strong/Medium/Weak)
• •ROI Analysis:
  • •fix_effort: trivial | minor | moderate | significant | major
  • •benefit_type: security | reliability | performance | maintainability | correctness
  • •roi_score: 0.0-1.0 (benefit / effort ratio)
  • •override_decision: pull_forward | keep | push_back
  • •override_reason: [Why changing priority]

Return: challenge_result (UPHELD|DOWNGRADED|DISMISSED), evidence_quality, recommended_confidence, roi_analysis </agent>

Use git history to find justifications for seemingly problematic patterns. Return: Context justifications for historical code choices. </agent>

<wait-for-all>WAIT for both agents to complete.</wait-for-all> </step>

If task modified API or CLI:

• • API documentation files
• • CLI command documentation
• • Usage examples in docs

If task modified data structures:

• • Type definition docs
• • Schema documentation
• • Migration notes if breaking change

Search strategy:

# Find docs that might reference changed files
for file in [modified_files]; do
  grep -r "$(basename $file .ts)" docs/ README.md CLAUDE.md
done

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Co-Authored-By: Claude noreply@anthropic.com" git log -1 --oneline # Capture commit SHA

</commands>

<checkpoint>Commit SHA captured for evidence.</checkpoint>

<compound-prompt>
After successful commit, display:

Committed: [SHA]

Run /apex:compound [identifier] to capture learnings for future agents.

</compound-prompt>
</step>

<step id="7" title="Reflection and completion">
<critical>
You MUST record a final reflection. This is NOT optional.

Without reflection:
- Learnings aren't captured
- Pattern outcomes aren't recorded
- Future tasks don't benefit
</critical>

<reflection-format>
```markdown
### Reflection
- **Outcome**: success | partial | failure
- **Key Learning**: [Main lesson from this task]
- **Patterns Used**: [PAT:ID from plan] with outcome notes
- **New Patterns / Anti-patterns**: [If discovered]
- **Evidence**: [Commit SHA, files, tests]

<ship>
<metadata>
  <timestamp>[ISO]</timestamp>
  <outcome>success|partial|failure</outcome>
  <commit-sha>[SHA]</commit-sha>
</metadata>

<review-summary>
  <phase1-findings count="X">
    <by-severity critical="N" high="N" medium="N" low="N"/>
    <by-agent security="N" performance="N" architecture="N" testing="N" quality="N"/>
  </phase1-findings>
  <phase2-challenges>
    <upheld>N</upheld>
    <downgraded>N</downgraded>
    <dismissed>N</dismissed>
  </phase2-challenges>
  <false-positive-rate>[X%]</false-positive-rate>
</review-summary>

<contract-verification>
  <contract-version>[N]</contract-version>
  <amendments-audited>[List amendments or "none"]</amendments-audited>
  <acceptance-criteria-verification>
    <criterion id="AC-1" status="met|not-met">[Evidence or exception]</criterion>
  </acceptance-criteria-verification>
  <out-of-scope-check>[Confirm no out-of-scope work slipped in]</out-of-scope-check>
</contract-verification>

<action-items>
  <fix-now>
    <item id="[ID]" severity="[S]" confidence="[C]" location="[file:line]">
      [Issue and fix]
    </item>
  </fix-now>
  <should-fix>[Deferred items]</should-fix>
  <accepted>[Accepted risks with justification]</accepted>
  <dismissed>[False positives with reasons]</dismissed>
</action-items>

<commit>
  <sha>[Full SHA]</sha>
  <message>[Commit message]</message>
  <files>[List of files]</files>
</commit>

<reflection>
  <patterns-reported>
    <pattern id="PAT:X:Y" outcome="[outcome]"/>
  </patterns-reported>
  <key-learning>[Main lesson]</key-learning>
  <reflection-status>recorded|missing</reflection-status>
</reflection>

<final-summary>
  <what-was-built>[Concise description]</what-was-built>
  <patterns-applied count="N">[List]</patterns-applied>
  <test-status passed="X" failed="Y"/>
  <documentation-updated>[What docs changed]</documentation-updated>
</final-summary>
</ship>

📊 Metrics:

• •Complexity: [X]/10
• •Files modified: [N]
• •Files created: [N]
• •Tests: [passed]/[total]

💬 Summary: [Concise description of what was built]

📚 Patterns:

• •Applied: [N] patterns
• •Reflection: ✅ Recorded

✅ Acceptance Criteria:

• •AC-* coverage: [met|not met with exceptions]

🔍 Review:

• •Phase 1 findings: [N]
• •Dismissed as false positives: [N] ([X]%)
• •Action items: [N] (all resolved)

⏭️ Next: Task complete. No further action required. </template> </step>

• • Phase 1 review agents launched and returned?
• • Phase 2 challenge agents launched and returned (with ROI analysis)?
• • Documentation checklist completed?
• • Contract verification completed (AC mapping + out-of-scope check)?
• • Git commit created? (verify with git log -1)
• • Reflection recorded in <ship><reflection>?

If ANY unchecked → GO BACK AND COMPLETE IT. </completion-verification>