Review Criteria Skill

This skill defines how the CEO (Claude) reviews outputs from Codex workers.

Review Framework

Every Codex output must be reviewed across 5 dimensions:

1. Completeness (Required)

Question: Did the worker do what was asked?

Checklist:

• • All files in task specification were created/modified
• • The "Do" instruction was followed
• • Output contains completion signal (TASK_COMPLETE)

Fail Conditions:

• •Missing files that were specified
• •Partial implementation with TODO comments
• •No completion signal

2. Acceptance Criteria (Required)

Question: Does the output meet all acceptance criteria?

Process:

For each acceptance criterion in the task:

- [ ] AC-1: {criterion} → PASS/FAIL: {reason}
- [ ] AC-2: {criterion} → PASS/FAIL: {reason}
- [ ] AC-3: {criterion} → PASS/FAIL: {reason}

Criteria Met: {passed}/{total}

Fail Conditions:

• •Any P0/P1 criterion fails
• •More than 50% of criteria fail

3. Code Quality (Required)

Question: Is the code well-written?

Fail Conditions:

• •Doesn't follow existing patterns
• •Contains obvious bugs
• •Missing critical error handling
• •Security vulnerability present

4. Integration (Required)

Question: Will this work with existing code?

Checklist:

• • Imports are correct and exist
• • Exports match expected interface
• • No circular dependencies
• • Types are compatible (if TypeScript)

Fail Conditions:

• •Broken imports
• •Type mismatches
• •Circular dependency introduced

5. Completeness of Output (Optional)

Question: Is the output complete and usable?

Checklist:

• • No placeholder comments (// TODO, // FIXME)
• • No incomplete implementations
• • No ... or ellipsis in code
• • File contents are complete

Fail Conditions:

• •Contains placeholder code
• •Implementation is skeletal

Review Decision Matrix

Writing Review Feedback

For APPROVED

## Review: Task {id} - APPROVED ✓

All criteria met. Output is ready for verification.

**Summary**:
- Completeness: PASS
- Acceptance: {n}/{n} criteria met
- Quality: Good
- Integration: Compatible

For NEEDS_REVISION

## Review: Task {id} - NEEDS_REVISION ↻

Attempt {n} of {max}. Issues found:

**Issue 1**: {Specific issue}
- File: {path}
- Line: {number} (if applicable)
- Current: {what's wrong}
- Expected: {what's needed}
- Fix: {specific instruction}

**Issue 2**: {Specific issue}
- Fix: {specific instruction}

**Focus Areas for Retry**:
1. {Priority 1}
2. {Priority 2}

For ESCALATE

## Review: Task {id} - ESCALATE ⚠️

Max retries ({max}) reached or blocking issue found.

**Reason for Escalation**: {why}

**Attempts Summary**:
| Attempt | Issue | Feedback Given |
|---------|-------|----------------|
| 1 | {issue} | {feedback} |
| 2 | {issue} | {feedback} |
| 3 | {issue} | {feedback} |

**Options for User**:
1. Provide additional guidance and retry
2. Manually implement this task
3. Skip this task (if [OPTIONAL])
4. Modify requirements

Quality Standards

Code Pattern Matching

When reviewing, compare against:

1. •Files in the same directory
2. •Similar components/functions in codebase
3. •Patterns specified in design.md
4. •Project style guide (if exists)

Common Issues to Watch For

JavaScript/TypeScript:

• •Missing async/await
• •Unhandled promise rejections
• •Incorrect this binding
• •Missing type annotations

React:

• •Missing key props in lists
• •Direct state mutation
• •Missing dependency arrays in hooks
• •Memory leaks (missing cleanup)

API/Backend:

• •Missing input validation
• •SQL injection risks
• •Missing authentication checks
• •Improper error responses

Iteration Limits