code-reviewlisted

# Nebu Code Review Review for correctness, requirements, and risk first. Enforce `rules/coding-standards.md` hard rules (intent comments, meaningful names, DRY, explicit shapes, language rules) as correctness — not style. This is a mandatory second pass after **every** code edit. Review depth scales with risk — but no edit skips review entirely. ## Review checklist - Does the diff solve the asked problem? - Follows `rules/coding-standards.md`? — intent comments on every function, DRY, meaningful names, explicit data shapes, language-specific rules, fail-fast error handling - Did it change anything outside scope? - Is the proof proportional to the risk? - Are docs or follow-on changes needed? ## Apply proportionally - Tiny, local change: quick checklist pass — still required, just fast. - Medium or subtle change: use a review agent or second pass. - Risky or cross-cutting diff: review against requirements and likely regressions explicitly. ## Improvement hook - If review reveals reusable workflow gap or skill usage miss, run `session-review` to file improvement. - Prefer updating an existing skill or router rule when that would prevent same miss next time. - If not fixing now, create or reuse follow-up issue via `session-review`. ## Good review comments - Point to the risk - Explain why it matters - Suggest the next move ## Use with - `develop` when the coding pass is done and the diff needs a second look - `verification` after review passes to confirm the claim is