Align pr-flow review table with swarm findings-table layout - #27
Merged
Conversation
Rewrite REVIEW-OUTPUT-FORMAT.md to the shared layout used by /swarm:review: - icon-only Sev and Verdict columns; split old prose "My assessment" into an icon-only Verdict (✅/🟨/❌) plus a short Note (required for 🟨/❌) - fold the separate "Previously raised" table into a Status column (🔧/⏭️/🔁/🆕), shown only on re-reviews; # stays stable across cycles - document that swarm's Agents/Verifier (Quelle) column is swarm-only Sweep /cycle and /fix for the old Agree/Partial/Disagree text values and column names; update README column list. Bump pr-flow 1.2.2 -> 1.2.3. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AXNA67uyPzCDNdKWRf3t6g
Apply the agreed findings from the local swarm review of PR #27: - REVIEW-OUTPUT-FORMAT.md: drop Sev/Verdict from the translate-list (keep them as fixed tokens, matching the German header example); define the `mechanism` matching key with an example; scope stable-# to a single /cycle loop; carve out the zero-findings shortcut so re-reviews still render the Status table for prior findings - /open, README: complete the consumer sweep the task under-scoped — /open no longer names the removed "previously-raised" section; README lists all five format consumers (adds /open, /rebase) - /cycle: replace the leftover `Disagree` literal with ❌ disagree - /fix: note sequential #1 numbering is expected (no prior-cycle numbers) - /check: note it renders a snapshot only, no Status column Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AXNA67uyPzCDNdKWRf3t6g
Apply the agreed findings from the deepest-effort swarm review of PR #27: - REVIEW-OUTPUT-FORMAT.md: scope the Status column + stable-# to /cycle --loop, the only producer that holds prior findings in-session; name the stateless single-shot consumers (/check, /open, /rebase, standalone /fix) that always render round-0. Make the Recommendation branch treat a carried-over unresolved 🔴 as blocking so a skipped blocker can't yield "Ready to merge". Soften the swarm-parity claim (same table family, not byte-identical — swarm uses a one-char V header + tighter budgets for its extra Quelle column). Add /open + /rebase to the consumer blockquote. - /cycle: give the loop a SEEN store keyed by (file, mechanism) that carries #/verdict/disposition forward so re-reviews can populate Status. - /rebase: bring its review-render step up to /open's contract. - /fix: drop the duplicated stable-# rationale, cross-ref the spec instead. - README: fix walkthrough now describes the up-front Verdict table; parity wording softened to match the spec. Icon-only severity (raised as not color-robust) left as-is: it's the deliberate task spec, and 🔴/🟡/⚪ are distinct codepoints (screen-reader / plain-text safe). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AXNA67uyPzCDNdKWRf3t6g
Extend skill-composition §3 with two rules the REVIEW-OUTPUT-FORMAT spec settled in PR #27: cross-plugin format sharing is same-family not byte-identical (column count drives swarm's tighter compression), and a contract mandating cross-cycle state (Status/stable-#) must name its sole producer (in-session /cycle --loop) or it's unimplementable prose. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AXNA67uyPzCDNdKWRf3t6g
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
/swarm:review(narrow icon-only judgment columns + separate short note).My assessmentprose column into an icon-onlyVerdict(✅/🟨/❌) plus a shortNote.Statuscolumn shown only on re-reviews, with stable finding numbers across cycles.Changes
docs/REVIEW-OUTPUT-FORMAT.md— rewritten to the shared 6-column layout# · Sev · Location · Finding · Verdict · Note;Sev/Verdicticon-only;Noterequired for 🟨/❌, optional for ✅. Documents that swarm'sAgents/Verifier(Quelle) column is swarm-only.Statuscolumn (🔧/⏭️/🔁/🆕) replaces the "Previously raised" section;#stays stable across cycles (match by(file, mechanism)).skills/cycle/SKILL.md,skills/fix/SKILL.md— swept oldAgree/Partial agree/Disagreetext values and column names over to the Verdict icons.README.md— updated the column list in the format description.1.2.2→1.2.3(patch: format alignment, no new feature); marketplace.json synced.Readiness
check-structure.py) — 0 errorsTest plan
python3 scripts/check-structure.pystays green/cycle,/check,/fixrender the new 6-column table (icon-only Sev/Verdict)Statuscolumn with stable finding numbers🤖 Generated with Claude Code