tastelisted

# Taste - the chef tastes every plate before it leaves the kitchen A reviewer from a different training lineage doesn't share your blind spots - cross-model review reliably catches edge-case bugs that self-review misses. But raw Codex findings over-flag, so nothing reaches the user unvalidated: the deliverable of a taste is the CONFIRMED set, written to disk where a refire can pick it up. If `codex` is missing or `~/.codex/expo.config.toml` doesn't exist, stop and offer `/expo:mise` (Codex silently ignores a missing profile - check with `test -f`, don't rely on an error). ## 1. Scope the diff ```bash git status --short --untracked-files=all git diff --shortstat && git diff --shortstat --cached ``` - Working-tree review (default): staged + unstaged + untracked count as reviewable. - Branch review (user said "review this branch/PR"): scope with `git diff <base>...HEAD`. - Post-fire review (a pre-fire baseline exists - inside `/expo:serve`, or tasting a fire's result on a tree that was dirty before the fire): the change under review is the delta since that baseline, never the whole tree. Scope the prompt to it - name the files the run touched, and point at the baseline patch for files that mix fired changes with prior WIP. Findings against pre-existing WIP would send a refire rewriting the user's own uncommitted work; say in the report that WIP was excluded. - Empty scope → say there's nothing to review; don't run Codex on nothing. - **Large diffs review shallow.*