autoreview

Run the bundled structured review helper as a closeout check. This is code review, not Guardian auto_review approval routing.

Codex review is the default when no engine is set. It uses gpt-5.5 by default, usually delivers the best review results, and should remain the normal final closeout engine. Claude review is optional and uses claude-fable-5 by default.

Use when:

• user asks for Codex review / Claude review / Pi review / Droid review / Cursor review / OpenCode review / autoreview / second-model review
• after non-trivial code edits, before final/commit/ship
• reviewing a local branch or PR branch after fixes
• user asks to review a branch, PR, or diff "since X" against an issue, PRD, spec, or documented standard

Standards / Spec Axis

For branch, PR, or "review since X" work, preserve two separate review axes from Matt Pocock's review skill:

• Standards: Does the diff follow the repo's documented coding, product, UI, security, and process standards?
• Spec: Does the diff implement the originating issue, PRD, user request, or acceptance criteria?

Pin the fixed point before reviewing. Prefer the true PR base; otherwise use the user-supplied commit, branch, tag, or merge-base. Confirm the diff is non-empty before spending review time.

Find the spec source in this order: issue/PR references in commit messages, a path the user gave, PRD/spec files under docs/, specs/, .scratch/, or the original user request in the current thread. If no spec exists, say "no spec available" and run the Standards axis only.

Find standards sources from AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, .cursorrules, .cursor/rules/, CONTRIBUTING.md, CODING_STANDARDS.md, docs/, and any repo-local design or security guides.

Add the Fowler smell baseline to the Standards axis even when the repo documents no standards. A repo standard overrides this baseline, and every smell is a judgement call, not a hard violation. Skip anything tooling already enforces. Use labels like "possible Feature Envy" and tie the finding to the diff hunk:

When reporting findings, keep the axes separate. Do not let a clean Standards result hide a Spec miss, and do not let correct functionality hide a standards violation. If using the structured helper, pass the spec and standards context through a prompt file or dataset when practical; otherwise apply the split manually after reading the diff.

Contract

• Treat review output as advisory. Never blindly apply it.
• Verify every finding by reading the real code path and adjacent files.
• Read dependency docs/source/types when the finding depends on external behavior.
• Reject unrealistic edge cases, speculative risks, broad rewrites, and fixes that over-complicate the codebase.
• Prefer small fixes at the right ownership boundary; no refactor unless it clearly improves the bug class.
• When an accepted finding shows a bug class or repeated pattern, inspect the current PR scope for sibling instances before fixing.
• Fix the scoped bug class at once when practical; stop at touched surfaces, owner boundaries, and clear follow-up territory.
• Keep going until structured review returns no accepted/actionable findings only while the work remains inside the original task scope.
• If a review-triggered fix changes code, rerun focused tests and rerun the structured review helper.
• For security-audit suppression changes, verify accepted findings remain auditable: suppressed findings stay in structured output, active output keeps an unsuppressible suppression notice, and aggregate findings cannot hide unrelated active risk.
• Never switch or override the requested review engine/model. If the review hits model capacity, retry the same command a few times with the same engine/model.
• Be patient with large bundles. Structured review can take up to 30 minutes while the model call is active, especially with Codex tools or web search.
• Treat heartbeat lines like review still running: ... elapsed=... pid=... as healthy progress, not a hang. Let the helper continue while heartbeats are advancing. Pass --stream-engine-output when live engine text is useful; Codex, Claude, and Cursor filter tool/file chatter, other engines pass raw output through.
• Do not kill a review just because it has been quiet for 2-5 minutes, or because it is still running under the 30-minute window. Inspect the process only after missing multiple expected heartbeats, after 30 minutes, or after an obviously failed subprocess; prefer letting the same helper command finish.
• Tools are useful in review mode. The helper allows read-only inspection tools and web search by default so reviewers can check dependency contracts, upstream docs, and current behavior.
• Security perspective is always included, but it should not cripple legitimate functionality. Report security findings only when the change creates a concrete, actionable risk or removes an important safety check.
• For regression provenance, keep roles separate: blamed code author, blamed PR author, PR merger/committer, current PR author, and PR/date. If no blamed PR is traceable, use the blamed commit as the provenance: commit SHA, date, and author username. Do not guess a merger or frame missing PR metadata as a separate finding.
• If the blamed PR was merged by clawsweeper[bot] or another automation, identify the human trigger when practical. Check timeline/comments first; if rate-limited, use gitcrawl/cache or public PR HTML. Look for maintainer commands such as @clawsweeper automerge, /landpr, or labels/status comments that armed automerge. Report automerge triggered by @login; if not found, say trigger unknown.
• Do not invoke built-in codex review, nested reviewers, or reviewer panels from inside the review. The helper builds one bundle, calls one selected engine, validates one structured result, and stops.
• Stop as soon as the helper exits 0 with no accepted/actionable findings. Do not run an extra review just to get a nicer "clean" line, a second opinion, or clearer closeout wording.
• Treat the helper's successful exit plus absence of actionable findings as the clean review result, even if the underlying Codex CLI output is terse.
• Multi-reviewer panels are opt-in only. Use them when explicitly requested or when risk justifies the extra spend; the main agent still verifies every accepted finding before fixing.
• If rejecting a finding as intentional/not worth fixing, add a brief inline code comment only when it explains a real invariant or ownership decision that future reviewers should know.
• If gh/Gitcrawl reports database disk image is malformed, run gitcrawl doctor --json once to let the portable cache repair before retrying review; do not bypass the shim unless repair fails and freshness requires live GitHub.
• If Gitcrawl reports a portable manifest mismatch, source/runtime DB health error, or stale portable-store checkout, run gitcrawl doctor --json and inspect source_db_health, runtime_db_health, and portable_store_status before falling back to live GitHub.
• Do not push just to review. Push only when the user requested push/ship/PR update.

Scope Governor

Autoreview is a closeout gate, not permission to rewrite the task.

Before the first review, freeze a scope baseline: original request or issue, target branch, intended behavior, owner boundary, changed files, and non-test LOC. For inherited or already-bloated branches, use the intended PR diff as the baseline rather than accepting all existing branch drift.

Before patching a finding, classify it:

• In-scope blocker: the finding is introduced by the current diff, affects the same owner boundary, and can be fixed without changing the task's contract.
• Follow-up: the finding is real but belongs to an adjacent bug class, sibling surface, cleanup, or broader hardening track.
• Stop-and-escalate: the finding requires a new protocol/config/storage/public API contract, a different owner boundary, a release-process change, or a design choice outside the original request.

Stop patching and report the scope break instead of continuing when:

• a narrow PR turns into an architecture change, protocol change, migration, or release-process change;
• the diff grows past 2x the original files or non-test LOC without explicit approval to expand scope;
• two review-triggered patch cycles have not converged; pause and reclassify every remaining finding before another edit;
• the best fix is "define the canonical contract first" rather than another local inference layer;
• fixing the accepted finding would make the PR no longer describe the same behavior, issue, or owner boundary.

After the two-cycle pause, continue only when every remaining accepted finding is still an in-scope blocker. Otherwise preserve the useful analysis, identify the smallest safe landed subset if one exists, and open or request a follow-up for the larger fix. Do not keep committing speculative fixes just to satisfy the reviewer.

Do not stack or push review-triggered fix commits while scope classification or focused proof is unresolved. Keep exploratory edits local until the cycle is proven in scope; if scope breaks, remove them from the landing lane instead of preserving them as branch history.

Critical exceptions must be explicit: active data loss, crash, broken install/upgrade, release blocker, or concrete security exposure. If the exception is not one of those, it is not critical enough to blow up scope.

Deterministic Coverage Lane

For a large or heterogeneous diff, substantial untracked work, or an explicit full-coverage request, add OpenCodeReview's delegation mode when a reviewed ocr CLI is already available. It supplies deterministic file selection and path-rule resolution; this skill remains the review and judgment owner.

1. Freeze the same base/ref and authority used by the Standards and Spec axes.
2. Run ocr delegate preview --format json with the matching workspace, commit, or range flags. Do not install ocr merely because a review began.
3. Create a ledger from every reviewable_files row, keyed by (path, status). Preserve excluded rows and their reasons. The status is part of identity because one workspace can contain a staged deletion and an untracked recreation at the same path.
4. Run ocr delegate rule --format json <paths...> in bounded batches, inspect every file against its resolved rules plus this skill's Standards and Spec contracts, and mark each ledger row reviewed or skipped with a concrete reason.
5. Report totals, reviewed rows, skipped rows, and coverage rate. Never return a clean result while a previewed row is unaccounted for.

Delegation mode must not silently widen authority. Provider configuration, telemetry, comment publication, fixes, and global CLI installation are separate decisions. If ocr is unavailable, keep the same ledger invariant using Git diff/status evidence rather than degrading to undocumented sampling.

Release Branches And Release Process

On release, beta, stable, hotfix, signing, notarization, appcast, package-publish, or release-check work, use freeze discipline even when the branch name is not release-like:

• Fix only release blockers, failed release infrastructure, exact backports, install/upgrade breakage, data loss, crashes, or concrete security exposure.
• Treat non-blocking autoreview findings as follow-ups for main, not reasons to broaden the release branch.
• Do not introduce new product behavior, config surface, protocol shape, migration, plugin ownership, docs narrative, or process policy unless it directly unblocks the release.
• Keep proof tied to the release target: exact branch/ref, failing check or shipped-risk reason, smallest command/proof, and whether the fix must also forward-port to main.
• If review discovers a real but non-critical design problem during release closeout, stop with a follow-up issue/PR plan; do not use the release branch as the refactor lane.

Skill Path (set once)

Set the skill script paths once, then use "$AUTOREVIEW" and "$AUTOREVIEW_HARNESS" in the examples below.

Choose one:

# Project-local skill in the current repo:
export AUTOREVIEW=".agents/skills/autoreview/scripts/autoreview"
export AUTOREVIEW_HARNESS=".agents/skills/autoreview/scripts/test-review-harness"

# Source checkout of openclaw/agent-skills:
export AUTOREVIEW="skills/autoreview/scripts/autoreview"
export AUTOREVIEW_HARNESS="skills/autoreview/scripts/test-review-harness"

# Global skill:
export AGENTS_HOME="${AGENTS_HOME:-$HOME/.agents}"
export AUTOREVIEW="$AGENTS_HOME/skills/autoreview/scripts/autoreview"
export AUTOREVIEW_HARNESS="$AGENTS_HOME/skills/autoreview/scripts/test-review-harness"

When using Claude Code, set AGENTS_HOME="$HOME/.claude" for global skills. Project-local skills live under .claude/skills/ in the current repo.

Pick Target

Dirty local work:

"$AUTOREVIEW" --mode local

Use this only when the patch is actually unstaged/staged/untracked in the current checkout. --mode uncommitted is accepted as an alias for --mode local. For committed, pushed, or PR work, point the helper at the commit or branch diff instead; do not force dirty modes just because the helper docs mention dirty work first. A clean local review only proves there is no local patch.

Branch/PR work:

"$AUTOREVIEW" --mode branch --base origin/main

Optional review context is first-class. Prompt files and datasets must be repo-relative so review bundles cannot pull arbitrary host files:

"$AUTOREVIEW" --mode branch --base origin/main --prompt-file review-notes.md --dataset evidence.json

If an open PR exists, use its actual base:

base=$(gh pr view --json baseRefName --jq .baseRefName)
"$AUTOREVIEW" --mode branch --base "origin/$base"

Committed single change:

"$AUTOREVIEW" --mode commit --commit HEAD

Use commit review for already-landed or already-pushed work on main. Reviewing clean main against origin/main is usually an empty diff after push. For a small stack, review each commit explicitly or review the branch before merging with --base.

Parallel Closeout

Format first if formatting can change line locations. Then it is OK to run tests and review in parallel:

"$AUTOREVIEW" --parallel-tests "<focused test command>"

On Windows, the default --parallel-tests shell preserves the platform cmd.exe semantics used by Python shell=True. Use --parallel-tests-shell powershell or --parallel-tests-shell pwsh when the focused test command is PowerShell-specific.

Tradeoff: tests may force code changes that stale the review. If tests or review lead to code edits, rerun the affected tests and rerun review until no accepted/actionable findings remain. Once that rerun exits cleanly, stop; do not spend another long review cycle on redundant confirmation.

Review Panels

Run multiple reviewers against one frozen bundle:

"$AUTOREVIEW" --reviewers codex,claude,pi,droid

--panel is shorthand for Codex plus Claude unless --engine changes the first reviewer:

"$AUTOREVIEW" --panel

Set reviewer models and thinking/effort explicitly:

"$AUTOREVIEW" --reviewers codex,claude --model codex=gpt-5.5 --thinking codex=high --model claude=claude-fable-5 --thinking claude=max

Inline syntax is also supported for simple model IDs:

"$AUTOREVIEW" --reviewers codex:gpt-5.5:high,claude:claude-fable-5:max

For models with slashes or extra colons, prefer keyed form:

"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine pi --model anthropic/claude-sonnet-4 --thinking high
"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine opencode --model opencode/north-mini-code-free --thinking high
"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine cursor --model auto
"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine droid --model claude-opus-4-8 --thinking low
"$AUTOREVIEW" --reviewers codex,pi --model codex=gpt-5.5 --model pi=anthropic/claude-sonnet-4
"$AUTOREVIEW" --reviewers codex,opencode --model codex=gpt-5.5 --model opencode=opencode/north-mini-code-free
"$AUTOREVIEW" --reviewers codex,cursor --model codex=gpt-5.5 --model cursor=auto
"$AUTOREVIEW" --reviewers codex,droid --model codex=gpt-5.5 --model droid=claude-opus-4-8

--reviewers all covers Codex, Claude, Droid, Copilot, Pi, and OpenCode. Cursor is explicit opt-in (--engine cursor or named in --reviewers) because the current Cursor CLI does not document a per-run flag that ignores project-local instructions/config.

Models and thinking

The helper accepts --model globally or per engine (engine=model) and --thinking globally or per engine (engine=level). Repeat either flag for multiple reviewers.

Recommended model defaults:

CLI flags and environment variables override these defaults. Droid, Copilot, Pi, Cursor, and OpenCode do not get built-in model defaults here because their provider catalogs are external to the Codex/Claude closeout path and may vary by installation.

Claude also supports --fallback-model a,b for availability-based fallback chains (model-config). Current Claude docs note that auth, billing, rate-limit, request-size, and transport errors do not trigger fallback, and the changelog documents interactive-session support in v2.1.166.

Examples matching current main behavior:

# Codex with explicit model and reasoning
"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine codex --model gpt-5.5 --thinking high

# Claude Code aliases or full model names, with optional availability fallback
"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine claude --model claude-fable-5 --thinking max
"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine claude --model claude-fable-5 --fallback-model claude-opus-4-8,claude-sonnet-4-6

# Factory Droid with explicit model and reasoning effort
"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine droid --model claude-opus-4-8 --thinking low

# GitHub Copilot (model only; no thinking knob)
"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine copilot --model gpt-5.2

# Pi with explicit model and thinking level
"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine pi --model anthropic/claude-sonnet-4 --thinking high --pi-bin pi

# Cursor print-mode review
"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine cursor --model auto --cursor-bin cursor-agent

# OpenCode with explicit provider/model and variant
"$AUTOREVIEW" --engine opencode --model opencode/north-mini-code-free --thinking high

Environment defaults

CLI flags take precedence over environment variables.

Codex maps thinking to model_reasoning_effort. Claude maps thinking to --effort. Droid maps thinking to -r, --reasoning-effort. Pi maps thinking to --thinking. OpenCode maps thinking to --variant. Copilot and Cursor reject --thinking. Only Claude accepts --fallback-model; global CLI/env fallback requires at least one Claude reviewer, and engine-specific fallback overrides require that reviewer to be selected. Non-Claude fallback overrides, including AUTOREVIEW_<NONCLAUDE>_FALLBACK_MODEL, fail closed instead of being silently ignored.

Review engine isolation

When autoreview runs inside the repository under review, external reviewer CLIs must not load project-local trust or configuration that the branch controls.

Codex --ignore-user-config skips config loading for the exec run. Autoreview reconstructs only the documented cli_auth_credentials_store, forced_login_method, and forced_chatgpt_workspace_id settings from CODEX_HOME/config.toml, keeping authentication and workspace restrictions usable without forwarding unrelated user configuration. The explicit repo trust override and zero project-doc budget keep reviewed-repo AGENTS.md and .codex/ trust surfaces out of the review prompt. --ignore-rules skips user/project execpolicy rules. Claude --safe-mode disables project hooks, skills, plugins, MCP servers, and CLAUDE.md while preserving normal authentication, model selection, built-in tools, and permissions; managed settings policy can still apply. --setting-sources user avoids project/local settings from the reviewed checkout, and current Claude Code docs note the project-skill blocking behavior was fixed in v2.1.69. --strict-mcp-config and --disallowedTools mcp__* keep MCP unavailable to the review run. --bare is not used here because Claude's headless docs say it skips OAuth and keychain reads. Pi --no-approve ignores project-local files for one run; the helper requires Pi v0.79.0+ plus help output that advertises every required isolation flag because older legacy binaries can ignore unknown flags. The current package is @earendil-works/pi-coding-agent; deprecated @mariozechner/pi-coding-agent 0.73.x is intentionally rejected. Pi version/help probes and the review command run from neutral temporary directories, not the reviewed repo. Pi --no-context-files removes AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md, the resource-disable flags keep .pi extensions, skills, prompts, and themes out of the run, --no-session avoids writing review sessions, and the read-only allowlist omits bash, edit, and write. OpenCode starts from a neutral temporary directory, points at the reviewed repo with --dir, disables project config through OPENCODE_DISABLE_PROJECT_CONFIG=1, and injects OPENCODE_CONFIG_CONTENT; permissions default to deny, allow read/grep/glob, preserve OpenCode's .env ask rules, and gate websearch/webfetch with --no-web-search. The injected config also clears command/instruction/plugin arrays and disables write/edit/bash/task/skill/todowrite tools without changing user auth storage. Cursor's documented headless path is print mode with JSON output and workspace-relative discovery through cwd; current docs and installed help do not advertise the original PR's --trust, --workspace, --mode, or --sandbox flags. The helper therefore fails closed before invoking Cursor when the reviewed repo contains AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, .cursorrules, .cursor/rules, .cursor/cli.json, .cursor/mcp.json, .mcp.json, or mcp.json, unless the caller explicitly passes --cursor-allow-workspace-instructions. Cursor capability probes run from neutral temporary directories with the sanitized engine environment. Review runs set documented CURSOR_CONFIG_DIR to an ephemeral configuration that allows workspace reads while denying shell commands and relative or absolute writes; project-local MCP config is always refused because MCP tools cannot be constrained to read-only review access. The helper sends review prompts to OpenCode and Cursor over stdin rather than argv and extracts final structured JSON from terminal result/text events. OpenCode and Cursor reject --no-tools; Cursor also rejects --no-web-search because the CLI does not expose a documented per-run web-search disable flag.

Context Efficiency

Run the helper directly so target selection, engine choice, structured validation, and exit status all stay in one path. If output is noisy, summarize the completed helper output after it returns; do not ask another agent or reviewer to rerun the review.

Helper

After setting AUTOREVIEW and AUTOREVIEW_HARNESS above:

"$AUTOREVIEW" --help

The smoke harness has thin shell wrappers over a shared Python implementation:

"$AUTOREVIEW_HARNESS" --fixture benign --engine codex

On native Windows, invoke the extensionless Python helper through Python:

python skills\autoreview\scripts\autoreview --help

and the smoke harness:

skills\autoreview\scripts\test-review-harness.ps1 -Fixture benign -Engine codex

The helper:

• chooses dirty local changes first
• accepts --mode uncommitted as an alias for --mode local
• otherwise uses current PR base if gh pr view works
• otherwise uses origin/main for non-main branches
• does not fetch automatically during branch review; the selected base ref must already resolve locally
• supports --engine codex, claude, droid, copilot, pi, opencode, and cursor; default is AUTOREVIEW_ENGINE or codex; Codex should remain the default when nothing is set
• resolves bare git, gh, reviewer, and PowerShell shell commands from absolute PATH entries only, never from the reviewed checkout; explicit relative --*-bin paths are resolved from the reviewed repository root
• use --mode commit --commit <ref> for already-committed work, especially clean main after landing
• should be left in --mode auto or forced to --mode branch for PR/branch work; do not force --mode local after committing
• writes only to stdout unless --output, --json-output, or live streamed engine stderr is set
• supports --dry-run, --parallel-tests, --parallel-tests-shell, --prompt, repo-relative --prompt-file, repo-relative --dataset, --no-tools, --no-web-search, and commit refs
• supports --stream-engine-output or AUTOREVIEW_STREAM_ENGINE_OUTPUT=1 for live engine text while preserving structured validation; Codex, Claude, and Cursor hide tool/file event details, emit compact activity summaries, and report usage at turn completion
• supports opt-in review panels with --panel / --reviewers, plus per-engine --model, --thinking, and Claude --fallback-model
• uses built-in model defaults codex=gpt-5.5 and claude=claude-fable-5; honors AUTOREVIEW_MODEL, AUTOREVIEW_THINKING, AUTOREVIEW_FALLBACK_MODEL, and per-engine AUTOREVIEW_<ENGINE>_MODEL / AUTOREVIEW_<ENGINE>_THINKING environment overrides when CLI flags are omitted
• allows read-only tools and web search by default where the selected CLI supports them; forbids nested review in the prompt; Codex is run through codex exec with auth-only user settings, read-only sandbox, reviewed-repo instruction/config/rule isolation flags, and structured output
• runs Claude with --safe-mode (v2.1.169+), --setting-sources user, MCP disabled, explicit allowed tools, and --fallback-model when set, so reviewed-repo hooks/skills/MCP do not affect the review run while normal auth still works; managed settings policy can still apply
• runs Droid with droid exec in read-only mode, forwards --model and -r, --reasoning-effort, and switches --output-format to stream-json when streaming is enabled
• runs Pi v0.79.0+ from neutral temporary directories with --no-approve, --no-session, disabled Pi context/resource loading, and built-in read-only tools (read,grep,find,ls) when tools are enabled
• runs OpenCode with opencode run --dir <repo> --pure --format json from a neutral temporary directory, forwards --model and --variant, injects deny-by-default permissions, disables project config loading, and passes the review prompt over stdin
• runs Cursor with cursor-agent --print --output-format json, forwards --model, passes the review prompt over stdin, and fails closed on project-local Cursor instructions/config/MCP unless explicitly allowed for trusted repos
• prints review still running: <engine> elapsed=<seconds>s pid=<pid> to stderr at long-running intervals while waiting for the selected review engine, unless streamed output or compact Codex activity has been visible recently
• prints autoreview clean: no accepted/actionable findings reported when the selected review command exits 0
• exits nonzero when accepted/actionable findings are present

Final Report

Include:

• review command used
• tests/proof run
• findings accepted/rejected, briefly why
• the clean review result from the final helper/review run, or why a remaining finding was consciously rejected

Do not run another review solely to improve the final report wording. If the final helper run exited 0 and produced no accepted/actionable findings, report that exact run as clean.