AgentStack
Browse Sign in
Browse Why AgentStack Sell Docs
Sign in
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Reviewer Protocol

skill-gustavo-meilus-superpipelines-reviewer-protocol · by gustavo-meilus

Loaded by the run-parity-test-h entry skill to supply operating protocol and invariants for false-positive review of validator findings in the parity-test-h pipeline. Not user-invocable.

— No reviews yet
0 installs
35 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-gustavo-meilus-superpipelines-reviewer-protocol

✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
  • ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
  • ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • ✓ Untrusted network calls
  • ✓ Known-malicious package signatures

What it can access

  • ✓ Network access No
  • ✓ Filesystem access No
  • ✓ Shell / process execution No
  • ✓ Environment & secrets No
  • ✓ Dynamic code execution No

From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.

View the full security report →

Verified badge

Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.

AgentStack Verified badge Links to your public security report.
[![AgentStack Verified](https://agentstack.voostack.com/badges/verified.svg)](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-gustavo-meilus-superpipelines-reviewer-protocol)

Reliability & compatibility

✓ Security review passed
0 installs to date
— no reviews yet
● 2mo ago

Declared compatibility

Claude CodeClaude Desktop

Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.

Preview Execution monitoring

We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.

How agent discovery & health will work →
Are you the author of Reviewer Protocol? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

Reviewer — Operational Protocol

The reviewer step reads the validator findings produced by the validator step, applies the C19 self-skepticism convention, and independently re-derives each finding from the raw YAML input to identify false positives. It writes a reviewed-findings.json file with a review_status per finding (confirmed or dismissed) and an optional review_note for dismissed findings. It is the second step of the parity-test-h Sequential pipeline (Pattern 1) on Tier 2 (Cursor/Windsurf/Cline), executing inline in the entry skill's session. The quality bar is: reviewed-findings.json must accurately reflect independent verification, not mere agreement with the validator.

Protocol

⚠️ REVIEWER ISOLATION WARNING: This reviewer is executing in the same session as the writer. No structural isolation exists. Exercise deliberate assumption-blindness: treat all writer outputs as potentially flawed and verify each claim independently. Do NOT anchor on the writer's conclusions — re-derive them from raw inputs.

1. DISCOVER

  1. Read inputs from the orchestrator execution context:
  • input_path: path to the original YAML config file (same file the validator read).
  • findings_path: path to validator-findings.json written by the validator step.
  • reviewed_findings_output_path: path where reviewed-findings.json must be written.
  • state_path: path to pipeline-state.json for status updates.
  • run_id: current run identifier.
  • root: resolved scope root.
  1. Verify findings_path exists and is a readable file. If not: update pipeline-state.json phases[1].status = "blocked"; emit BLOCKED with message: "Validator findings not found at {findings_path}. The validator step may have failed."
  2. Parse the findings JSON. If JSON is malformed: update pipeline-state.json phases[1].status = "blocked"; emit BLOCKED with message: "Validator findings at {findings_path} are not valid JSON. Re-run the validator step."
  3. Read the original YAML file at input_path independently. This is mandatory — the reviewer MUST NOT rely solely on the validator's interpretation of the YAML content.

2. PROCESS

Step 2.1 — Apply assumption-blindness:

Before reviewing any finding, re-parse the YAML file at input_path independently. Do NOT treat the validator's field-presence or type conclusions as ground truth. Derive the ground truth from the raw YAML document.

Step 2.2 — Review each finding:

For each finding in validator-findings.json, independently verify the claim:

  • required_field findings: Check whether the field is actually absent from the parsed YAML. If the field is present (possibly under an alias or nested path the validator missed), mark as "dismissed" with a review note explaining the false positive.
  • type_mismatch findings: Check the actual runtime type of the field value in the parsed YAML. YAML parsers may auto-coerce values (e.g., bare true is a boolean, "true" is a string, 30 is an integer, 30s is a string). Verify the validator's type assertion against the YAML-parsed value. If the assertion is incorrect, mark as "dismissed" with a note.
  • deprecated_key findings: Verify the key is actually present in the YAML document (not merely mentioned in a string value or comment). Verify the key name matches exactly (case-sensitive). If the key is absent or was incorrectly identified, mark as "dismissed" with a note.

Step 2.3 — Assign review_status:

For each finding, set:

  • "review_status": "confirmed" — the finding is independently verified as correct.
  • "review_status": "dismissed" — the finding is a false positive; include a non-null review_note explaining why.

Step 2.4 — Summarize:

Count:

  • confirmed: number of findings with review_status = "confirmed".
  • dismissed: number of findings with review_status = "dismissed".
  • false_positive_ids: array of id values for dismissed findings (may be empty).

Step 2.5 — Handle zero-finding input:

If validator-findings.json has total_findings = 0 and an empty findings array, produce a reviewed-findings.json with zero findings. Emit DONE_WITH_CONCERNS with message: "Validator produced zero findings. Reviewed-findings.json written with zero entries; no false-positive review was possible."

3. DELIVER

  1. Write reviewed-findings.json to reviewed_findings_output_path using the Write tool. Structure:
{
  "source_path": "{input_path}",
  "reviewed_at": "{iso8601}",
  "total_findings": 0,
  "confirmed": 0,
  "dismissed": 0,
  "false_positive_ids": [],
  "findings": []
}

Each finding in the findings array extends the original finding object with two additional fields:

  • "review_status": "confirmed" or "dismissed"
  • "review_note": string (explanation for dismissed findings) or null (for confirmed findings)
  1. Update pipeline-state.json:
  • Set phases[1].status = "completed" (or "completed_with_concerns" if zero findings input or if all findings were dismissed).
  • Set phases[1].outputs = [reviewed_findings_output_path].
  • Set phases[1].outputs_summary = { "total_findings": N, "confirmed": N, "dismissed": N, "false_positive_ids": [...] }.
  1. Emit terminal status:
  • DONE — reviewed-findings.json written successfully; at least one finding confirmed.
  • DONE_WITH_CONCERNS — reviewed-findings.json written but zero input findings, or all findings dismissed; surface the concern.
  • BLOCKED — findings file missing or malformed; output not written.
  • NEVER write reviewed findings to a path outside {ROOT}/superpipelines/temp/parity-test-h/{runId}/.
  • NEVER pass file contents back to the orchestrator in the status message — pass only the reviewed-findings file path.
  • NEVER hardcode platform paths — use only the root value supplied in the execution context.
  • NEVER accept the validator's conclusions without independently verifying against the raw YAML.
  • ALWAYS re-read the source YAML at input_path before reviewing any finding (mandatory per C19 assumption-blindness).
  • ALWAYS provide a review_note for every dismissed finding; review_note must not be null or empty for dismissed findings.
  • ALWAYS update pipeline-state.json phases[1] after writing reviewed findings.
  • ALWAYS include ALL findings in the reviewed output, whether confirmed or dismissed.
  • Emit exactly one terminal status: DONE / DONEWITHCONCERNS / NEEDS_CONTEXT / BLOCKED.

Source & license

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

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

Reviews

No reviews yet, be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.