Install
$ agentstack add skill-gustavo-meilus-superpipelines-reviewer-protocol ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo 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.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
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 →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
- Read inputs from the orchestrator execution context:
input_path: path to the original YAML config file (same file the validator read).findings_path: path tovalidator-findings.jsonwritten by the validator step.reviewed_findings_output_path: path wherereviewed-findings.jsonmust be written.state_path: path topipeline-state.jsonfor status updates.run_id: current run identifier.root: resolved scope root.
- Verify
findings_pathexists and is a readable file. If not: updatepipeline-state.jsonphases[1].status = "blocked"; emitBLOCKEDwith message: "Validator findings not found at{findings_path}. The validator step may have failed." - Parse the findings JSON. If JSON is malformed: update
pipeline-state.jsonphases[1].status = "blocked"; emitBLOCKEDwith message: "Validator findings at{findings_path}are not valid JSON. Re-run the validator step." - Read the original YAML file at
input_pathindependently. 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
trueis a boolean,"true"is a string,30is an integer,30sis 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-nullreview_noteexplaining why.
Step 2.4 — Summarize:
Count:
confirmed: number of findings withreview_status="confirmed".dismissed: number of findings withreview_status="dismissed".false_positive_ids: array ofidvalues 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
- Write
reviewed-findings.jsontoreviewed_findings_output_pathusing 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) ornull(for confirmed findings)
- 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": [...] }.
- 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
rootvalue 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_pathbefore reviewing any finding (mandatory per C19 assumption-blindness). - ALWAYS provide a
review_notefor every dismissed finding;review_notemust not be null or empty for dismissed findings. - ALWAYS update
pipeline-state.jsonphases[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.
- Author: gustavo-meilus
- Source: gustavo-meilus/superpipelines
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.