Deepworkplan Addon Ai Diff Reviewer

DeepWorkPlan — AI Diff Reviewer Addon

Connect the target repo to the AI Diff Reviewer (GitHub repo DailybotHQ/ai-diff-reviewer, marketplace listing "AI Diff Reviewer", current v2.0.0) so DWP work — the mandatory Security Review final task — is augmented with a structured local review (verdict + findings table + severity), and (in Flow B, optionally) every pull request to the target repo is gated by a CI-side review Action pinned to the same tag for byte-identical parity. This is an opt-in addon; it is never required for a repo to be AI-first. Missing skill/extension or invocation errors never block the work; critical findings from a completed local review still follow the existing Security Review contract (block until fixed or explicitly accepted).

> ## The rule that overrides everything: this addon DEFERS, it does not reinvent > > The upstream DailybotHQ/ai-diff-reviewer skill (currently v2.0.0) > already owns install, review methodology, the CI-workflow wizard, the > extension-file authoring flow, the PR-body drafting flow, and the post-CI > apply-review walkthrough — as five coordinated sub-skills (parent default > flow, generate-extension, setup, open-pr, apply-review). This > addon's job is narrow: (1) offer to install the vendored skill through > its own consent flow, (2) ask whether the consumer wants Flow A > (local-only) or Flow B (dual-surface) — never guess, matching the upstream > skill's own ambiguity tie-break policy, (3) if Flow B, defer to the > upstream setup sub-skill for the CI workflow, and (4) wire the parent > default flow into DWP create/execute so the mandatory Security Review is > augmented with a local review pass, plus (Flow B only) surface apply-review > as an available companion for post-CI walkthrough. It MUST NOT duplicate, > bypass, or weaken any upstream consent, auth, wizard, or review flow — it > points at them. (Normative source: [SPEC.md](SPEC.md).)

Positioning guardrail (read before anything)

The core DeepWorkPlan methodology has ZERO AI Diff Reviewer dependency. It is vendor-neutral, MIT, and agent-agnostic. A repo with zero addons — including this one — is fully conformant. This addon adds structured code-review quality to DWP work for developers who want it; declining leaves a fully AI-first repo. Never present the AI Diff Reviewer as a precondition for DWP, and never auto-install it for everyone.

Two officially-supported adoption flows

The upstream skill (v2.0.0+) defines two flows and requires consumers to pick explicitly. This addon MUST offer both at consent time and MUST NOT default to either.

| Flow | Use when | Sub-skills used | Sub-skills skipped | |------|----------|-----------------|--------------------| | A — local-only | Personal repos, experimental repos, or teams not (yet) ready for automated PR review. The vendored skill runs locally; the CI Action is NOT installed. | parent default flow (Security Review augmentation) + generate-extension (required for SR detection) + optionally open-pr | setup (would install the workflow), apply-review (nothing to apply back — no CI review posts) | | B — dual-surface | Team repos, production-facing repos, and anything where automated PR review is wanted. Skill + CI Action, both wired to the same .review/extension.md for byte-identical parity. Recommended for team repos. | All five: parent + generate-extension + setup + open-pr + apply-review | Nothing — all capabilities are used across the plan lifecycle |

Parity guarantee (Flow B). The upstream skill's prompt.md is byte-identical to the Action's shipped prompts/default.md at the same release tag (enforced by the upstream Skills — prompt-sync invariant CI job). Pinning the same version on both surfaces guarantees identical reviews. When setup wires prompt-extension-file: .review/extension.md, the CI Action reads the same file your local agent uses → same base prompt + same extension = same review, locally and in CI.

Read these first (all relative inside the skill)

• [SPEC.md](SPEC.md) — the normative (RFC-2119) contract: two flows, what is

installed (all opt-in), how auth is deferred, how the Security Review augmentation is wired, the optional apply-review companion, the never-block rule, and the vendor-neutral guardrail.

• [templates/INTEGRATION.md](templates/INTEGRATION.md) — reasoning guidance

(NOT copy-paste): detect-if-already-installed, how to ask for the flow, how to wire the Security Review augmentation, and the consent / never-block rules.

• ../README.md — the addon mechanism (opt-in, reconcile-don't-clobber, contract).

When this runs

• From onboard Phase 7b — after the core AI-first scaffolding, onboard

offers this addon alongside devcontainer / dailybot / dependency-upgrade / design-system; if accepted it reads this SKILL and runs the flow below.

• Directly — /deepworkplan-addon-ai-diff-reviewer on an already-onboarded

repo to add the review integration.

Trust boundary (write scope)

allowed-tools includes write-capable Edit and Write. Exactly what this addon may write — and what it MUST NOT — is enumerated below. Skills.sh / Gen Agent Trust Hub treat allowed-tools as a trust boundary; this section is the human-readable contract for that field. Anything not listed here does not happen.

Reads (always allowed, no consent needed):

• Local files under the current git checkout via Read / Grep / Glob /

Bash (detection only: existence of .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/, extension-file paths, pr-review.yml, .review/.skip-bootstrap).

• Upstream sub-skill docs under .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/** once

installed (to hand off correctly).

Writes (only after explicit developer acceptance of the relevant step):

• Vendored skill install — via npx --yes skills add … -y / `npx --yes

skills update … -y into .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/ + skills-lock.json`. Never run without Step 1 consent.

• Extension file — hand off to upstream generate-extension (writes

.review/extension.md or a consumer-chosen path). This addon itself does NOT invent severity rules; it only triggers the upstream sub-skill after the developer accepts the bootstrap offer.

• CI workflow (Flow B only) — hand off to upstream setup (writes

.github/workflows/pr-review.yml and related labels). This addon itself does NOT hand-roll the workflow or invent provider secrets.

• AGENTS.md / docs notes (optional) — a short pointer that the addon is

installed and which flow was chosen, only when the developer accepts a docs-update prompt. Reconcile; never clobber existing sections.

• Plan-time Security Review append — during execute, append the local

review output under ## AI Diff Reviewer local review in analysis_results/SECURITY_REVIEW.md (plan working state, typically gitignored). Never rewrite the rest of that file.

It MUST NOT:

• Store, echo, or commit provider secrets (CURSOR_API_KEY, API tokens).
• Pipe a remote installer into a shell (any single-line fetch-and-execute

variant).

• Auto-install for everyone or default to Flow B when the flow question is

unanswered.

• Clobber an existing .review/extension.md, pr-review.yml, or vendored

skill — reconcile gaps only.

• git commit / git push as part of the addon flow (those belong to the

surrounding DWP execute / maintainer workflow).

• Edit source files under the consumer's application tree — review findings

are applied (if at all) by the upstream apply-review sub-skill under its own per-finding consent contract, not by this addon.

The flow

Step 0 — Consent + recommend-only-if-relevant + choose the flow

1. Confirm relevance. Offer this addon only when it makes sense: the

developer or team wants structured code-review quality on DWP work, or explicitly asks for local pre-push review or PR merge-gating. In trust/auto mode you MAY recommend it only on that signal — do not auto-install for everyone. If the developer declines, stop cleanly; the repo stays baseline-conformant.

1. Ask the flow question — do NOT guess. This matches upstream v2.0.0's

own ambiguity tie-break policy. Present both flows plainly:

> This addon supports two adoption modes: > > Flow A — local-only. Vendored skill + a repo-tailored extension > file (via generate-extension); no GitHub Actions changes. Best for > personal or experimental repos, or teams not (yet) ready for automated > PR review. Once both are present, the DWP Security Review is augmented > with a local review pass — skill alone is not enough. > > Flow B — dual-surface. Skill + CI Action, both reading the same > .review/extension.md for byte-identical parity. Every PR to main > gets an AI review in CI, gated on a label of your choice (typical: > ready). Recommended for team repos. > > Which flow?

If the signal is unclear, ask; never default to Flow B (installing the workflow unrequested is a much bigger footprint than declining Flow B and only using the local review).

1. Detect existing setup (reconcile-don't-clobber). Before installing

anything, check what is already present (see templates/INTEGRATION.md):

• Vendored skill already installed at .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/?
• Extension file at one of the three recognized paths (in precedence

order): .review/extension.md > .github/ai-diff-reviewer/extension.md > .github/ai-pr-reviewer/extension.md (pre-v1.5 back-compat)?

• .review/.skip-bootstrap marker present (developer opted out of the

bootstrap offer previously — respect it)?

• .github/workflows/pr-review.yml or any workflow with

uses: DailybotHQ/ai-diff-reviewer (or the pre-rename DailybotHQ/ai-pr-reviewer — the 301 redirect keeps old pins working)?

• Provider secret documented anywhere (typical: CURSOR_API_KEY)?

If a piece already exists, do not redo it — record it and only fill gaps.

Step 1 — Offer the vendored skill install (OPT-IN, defer consent)

Present the install path and let the developer choose; never run an installer without their explicit acceptance.

• Vendored coding-agent skill (recommended — brings the five-sub-skill

router and the byte-identical prompt parity guarantee; current v2.0.0):

• npx --yes skills add DailybotHQ/ai-diff-reviewer --skill ai-diff-reviewer -y

(vendors into .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/ and records source + content hash in skills-lock.json; both --yes and -y are required — --yes covers npm's own prompt, subcommand -y covers the skills CLI's own "Which agents do you want to install to?" picker, which hangs in non-TTY without it — upstream fixed this in v1.7.0).

• Or pin to a specific tag: ... DailybotHQ/ai-diff-reviewer@v2.0.0 ....
• Bump to the latest with npx --yes skills update ai-diff-reviewer -y.

> Do not reimplement the install, and never pipe a remote installer to a > shell. The npx skills command is the supported, checksummed install > path — it records the content hash in skills-lock.json for reproducible > restores.

Step 1b — Bootstrap the extension file (REQUIRED for both flows)

Security Review detection (SPEC §6.1 / create / execute) requires skill + an extension file at one of the three recognized paths. Do not finish addon onboarding without one — otherwise every later Security Review will warn "install incomplete" and skip the local pass.

1. If an extension already exists at a recognized path → record it; do not

clobber (and do not migrate fallback/back-compat paths silently — ask).

1. If .review/.skip-bootstrap is present → the developer previously opted

out. Respect it: document that the local SR augmentation will not fire until they remove the marker and create an extension; do not surprise- bootstrap later during execute.

1. Otherwise → hand off to upstream generate-extension (or let the

developer hand-write .review/extension.md) before proceeding to Step 2 / Step 3. Preferred handoff: "generate a .review/extension.md for this repo".

Mid-plan execute MUST NOT surprise-bootstrap an extension — that is an onboarding concern, not a Security Review side effect.

Step 2 — CI workflow install — DEFER to the upstream setup sub-skill (Flow B only)

Do not hand-roll .github/workflows/pr-review.yml, do not prompt for API keys, and do not store any credential. When the developer chose Flow B, hand off to the upstream setup sub-skill — its 6-question wizard produces a workflow tuned to the consumer's choices (provider / strictness / trigger mode / external-contributor policy / PR-description mode / complexity labels), and setup/reference.md doubles as the reference manual for every action.yml input.

• Point at the vendored skill: .agents/skills/ai-diff-reviewer/setup/SKILL.md.
• Handoff phrase: "Set up AI Diff Reviewer for this repo" (or

/ai-diff-reviewer-setup) — workflow + label bootstrap only. Step 1b already required the extension file for both flows; do not re-enter generate-extension here unless Step 1b was skipped (e.g. explicit .review/.skip-bootstrap opt-out and the developer later reversed it).

• Provider secret: the wizard tells the maintainer which secret to configure

(typical: CURSOR_API_KEY for the Cursor provider). Maintainer sets it at Settings > Secrets and variables > Actions.

The addon MUST NOT reimplement the wizard. If the developer wants to skip the wizard, templates/INTEGRATION.md provides a fallback shape and points at the reference manual — but the wizard is the primary path.

Step 3 — Wire the Security Review augmentation into DWP execution

This is the integration value. Reasoning guidance is in templates/INTEGRATION.md — adapt it to the repo; do not copy verbatim.

• Add a short, clearly-optional note to the repo's DWP execution docs (the

generated AGENTS.md reporting section and/or docs/AI_AGENT_COLLAB.md) describing that when this addon is installed, the mandatory {N-2}.task_security_review.md template gains an additional post-existing-checks step:

1. Local review augmentation (both flows) — invoke the upstream

parent default flow ("Review my current branch"). Capture verdict + findings table + per-finding body + notes + recommendation. Append to analysis_results/SECURITY_REVIEW.md under a dedicated ## AI Diff Reviewer local review heading. A critical finding follows the existing SR contract — blocks completion until fixed or explicitly accepted. warning / info findings are appended and reported but do not block.

1. Optional post-CI walkthrough companion (Flow B only) — after the

plan's PR has been pushed and CI has reviewed it, the developer MAY invoke the upstream apply-review sub-skill from within the same execute session to walk through CI findings per-finding (apply / defer / skip) with explicit consent. apply-review is read-only by default; source-file edits require an explicit yes per finding; it never commits and never pushes. This is surfaced as an available option, not a new plan task file — the addon MUST NOT insert an apply-review task into any plan.

• Every hook MUST be best-effort and conditional: the local Security

Review pass fires only when the vendored skill is present and an extension file is detected, and it MUST NOT block create or execute if the skill is absent, detectio

…

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

• Author: DailybotHQ
• Source: DailybotHQ/agent-skill
• License: MIT

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.