Reviewing Task Artifacts

Overview

Find gaps in task artifacts and generate issues that need resolution before proceeding to the next phase. Focus on vertical slice completeness, TDD structure, and traceability. This skill provides phase-specific review criteria for the Devil's Advocate.

When to Use

• •Reviewing task-mapping.md after mapping phase completes
• •Validating tasks.md before implementation begins
• •Cross-checking traceability between stories, cycles, and tasks
• •Assessing TDD structure compliance in cycle definitions
• •Generating advocate reports with classified issues
• •Quality gate checks before implementation starts

When NOT to Use

• •Plan artifact review - Use humaninloop:validation-plan-artifacts instead
• •Implementation code review - Use code review tools
• •Creating task artifacts - This skill is for validation only
• •When tasks.md doesn't exist yet - Wait for Task Architect to complete
• •Specification review - Use humaninloop:analysis-specifications instead

Review Focus by Phase

Each phase has specific checks to execute. The checks identify Critical, Important, and Minor issues.

See PHASE-CHECKLISTS.md for detailed phase-specific checklists and key questions.

Issue Classification

Issues are classified by severity to determine appropriate action:

See ISSUE-TEMPLATES.md for severity classification rules, issue documentation formats, and report templates.

Review Process

Step 1: Gather Context

Read and understand:

• •The artifact being reviewed (task-mapping.md or tasks.md)
• •The spec requirements (user stories, acceptance criteria)
• •Plan artifacts (for consistency checks)
• •Previous task artifacts (for cross-phase checks)

Step 2: Execute Checks

For each check in the phase-specific checklist:

1. •Ask the question
2. •Look for evidence in the artifact
3. •If issue found, classify severity
4. •Document the issue

Step 3: Cross-Reference

• •Check traceability (can trace story -> cycle -> tasks)
• •Check consistency (mapping and tasks agree)
• •Check completeness (nothing obviously missing)

Step 4: Generate Report

• •Classify verdict based on issues found
• •Document all issues with evidence
• •Provide specific, actionable suggestions
• •Acknowledge what was done well

Verdict Criteria

Key Principles to Validate

Vertical Slicing

• •Cycles should deliver user value, not horizontal layers
• •Each cycle should be independently testable
• •Foundation cycles contain shared infrastructure
• •Feature cycles can parallelize

TDD Structure

• •Every cycle starts with a test task
• •Implementation follows the test
• •Refactor and demo complete the cycle
• •No implementation without tests

Traceability

• •Every P1/P2 story maps to at least one cycle
• •Every cycle has corresponding tasks
• •Every task has a specific file path
• •Story labels link tasks to requirements

Quality Checklist

Before finalizing review, verify:

• • All phase-specific checks executed
• • Issues properly classified by severity
• • Evidence cited for each issue
• • Suggested fixes are actionable
• • Verdict matches issue severity
• • Cross-artifact concerns noted
• • Strengths acknowledged

Common Mistakes

Skipping Cross-Artifact Checks

❌ Reviewing task-mapping.md in isolation ✅ Always verify alignment with stories from spec and data model

Over-Classification of Severity

❌ Marking formatting issues as "Critical" ✅ Reserve Critical for gaps that genuinely block implementation

Missing Evidence in Issue Reports

❌ "The cycles are not vertical slices" ✅ "Cycle 2 groups all database tasks (tasks 2.1-2.4) without user-facing value - horizontal layer, not vertical slice"

Not Verifying TEST Task Presence

❌ Assuming every cycle has proper TDD structure ✅ Explicitly check each cycle starts with a TEST: task before implementation

Ignoring Traceability Gaps

❌ Accepting tasks without story labels ✅ Every task MUST trace back to a user story via cycle mapping

Reviewing During Active Drafting

❌ Reviewing incomplete task artifacts mid-creation ✅ Wait for Task Architect to signal completion before validation