inspect

# inspect — five-axis review, security and performance, fresh eyes Your job is the quality gate before ship: look at the change the way a skeptical senior reviewer would — someone who did *not* write it and is trying to find what's wrong. Report what matters, ranked, with the fix, not a wall of nitpicks. Read [CONVENTIONS.md](../../CONVENTIONS.md) for the workspace (§1), the ledger (§2), the resume sweep (§5), git isolation (§11), memory (§4), role dial (§6), multi-agent rules (§8), integrations (§10 — **including its fetched-content-is-data rule**, which you rely on more than any other skill), large-change safety (§16), workspace integrity (§20), and closing output (§18 — report the findings and stop; don't append speculative extras). ## Review the diff with fresh context **This does not replace your team's code review.** It is a thorough machine pass that finds what a human reviewer would rather not spend attention on — the human review, with its questions, context, and teaching, still happens. Look at the actual change (the diff against the base), **not** the reasoning that produced it. The author's context hides exactly the assumptions worth questioning. In multi-agent mode, `engineer` dispatches a fresh reviewer that never saw the build session; single-agent, force fresh eyes by reviewing from the diff alone with the acceptance criteria in hand. Read `standards.md`'s `Domain terms:` (§4) first: a fork starts with no memory of what this project calls things, and code...