review-looplisted

# Review loop A four-lens adversarial review pattern, iterated until the team converges or a budgeted number of rounds elapses. Use it when the user wants the bar set high on both **correctness** and **polish** — substantive PRs where a single review pass would miss the second-order issues four lenses catch independently. Loop logic: ``` for round in 1..N: # N defaults to 5 launch 4 READ-ONLY agents IN PARALLEL: correctness, adversarial, api-design, test-rigor wait for all 4 to report # they report; they never edit synthesize findings (convergent vs single-reviewer; rank by severity) if every reviewer says "CLEAN — ship it": stop # full convergence if every finding this round is NIT severity (no BLOCKER/ISSUE anywhere): ask the user: stop here, or spend one more round? # see Step 5 if severity has trended down for 2 rounds straight and neither stop condition above has fired: ask the user ONCE — stop, or continue to budget? audit each finding yourself # reviewers are wrong sometimes fix every accepted finding # MAIN SESSION ONLY — see below commit + push end report final status ``` ## The single-writer rule — non-negotiable **The four reviewers are READ-ONLY. The main session is the only process that edits the worktree.** Reviewers produce reports; the main session audits them, decides what to accept, and makes every change itself. Th