TimZander / TimZander/claude

Tracker: deep-review delivery rework

Open
#223 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

enhancement
Dominant language
Python
Stars
0
Forks
1
Avg merge
1d 3h
Merged PRs (30d)
7

Description

Tracker for milestone deep-review: delivery rework. This issue is the overview — it stays open until every issue below is closed, and is the last issue to close when the milestone closes.

What this tracks

/deep-review was built for one channel and one reader: a terminal, read by the person who wrote the code. It's now being used to post comments on other people's PRs and to sweep 4–10 PRs at a time — two workflows it was never designed for. In those channels its defining feature (exhaustiveness, unbounded findings, synthesis at the bottom where a terminal reader's eye lands) becomes its defining failure.

The reframe this milestone is built on: the fix is not "make the review shorter" — a short review is a worse review. It's separating the review artifact (complete, exhaustive, unchanged) from its delivery (compact, audience-specific, per-channel). One analysis, several renderings.

Three audiences, currently served by one blob:

Audience Wants Medium
Reviewer running a sweep triage across N PRs, drill down on demand table / artifact
PR author what blocks merge, where, why — nothing else short PR comment + inline anchors
Agent (ours or the author's, later) full structured findings, stable identifiers machine-readable payload

Full framing, first-principles argument, and the ideas that didn't make the cut: #217.

Issues

# Issue Role Ready?
#217 Design discussion — framing, goal, delivery model decisions open now — gates everything except #220
#218 Structured findings as the canonical intermediate form foundation after #217 §6.1/§6.2
#219 PR-comment renderer — verdict-first + inline anchored blockers delivery after #218
#220 Auto-resolve the work item, grade against acceptance criteria capability gap ready to start
#221 Multi-PR sweep — triage table + drill-down artifact delivery after #218
#222 Delta re-review — fixed / still-open / new across rounds delivery after #218 + #219

Sequencing

  • #220 is unblocked and can start today. It's a capability gap, not a design question: deep-review never fetches the intent behind the work, so Step 4 "Feature Fitness" grades against what the author said they did rather than what was asked for. Only where its acceptance-criteria checklist lands in the output depends on the renderer.
  • #218 is the keystone. Every other delivery is a projection of a finding set. Build them on re-parsed prose and each one is fragile independently.
  • #219 owns the PR comment, which is where #222's round-to-round state lives — hence #222 needing both.
  • #221 and #222 are independent of each other and can run in parallel once #218 lands.

Decisions still open (from #217 §6)

These gate #218 and everything downstream. Tick as they're settled:

  • The goal. "Every defect found before merge" and "PRs land in two days" are different objectives; the skill currently optimizes only the first. Proposed: merge confidence per round trip.
  • One skill or two. Does /deep-review grow channel-aware rendering, or does a separate /post-review consume its output? The second composes better with #163 and #164.
  • The canonical intermediate form. What a finding record contains, and whether blocking is independent of severity.
  • What the PR comment contains by default. 💡 suppressed entirely, or collapsed in <details>?
  • Who casts the vote. The sweep suggests one — is the skill ever allowed to cast it?
  • Confirm exhaustiveness survives. It should stay unchanged in the artifact; only delivery is gated. Worth stating explicitly before anyone starts cutting review depth.

Not in scope

  • Changing what deep-review finds. Severity assignment (#211), review blind spots (#91), and pre-flight mechanical scanning (#181) are adjacent and cross-linked, but they're about analysis quality, not delivery. Deliberately left out so this milestone doesn't become "deep-review in general."
  • The other half of the round trip — #163 (respond to PR feedback) and #164 (verify resolution). They consume whatever format #219 produces, so the format needs to suit them, but they aren't blocked on this work.

Status

  • 2026-08-21 — Milestone opened. #217 filed with the framing; #218–#222 filed as the implementation split. #220 is ready to pick up; everything else waits on the §6 decisions.

Closing condition

Close this issue when #217 and #218–#222 are all closed (or explicitly dropped, with the reason noted here), and the milestone is ready to close behind it.


Note on relationships: GitHub's Blocked by links are GraphQL-only and weren't reachable from the session that filed these, so dependency order lives in each issue's Depends on section and in the Sequencing table above. The sub-issue list on this tracker provides the progress rollup. Adding the formal blocked-by edges later is a small cleanup — the addBlockedBy snippets are in standards/CLAUDE.md.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by reading #217 for the open design decisions and #220, the only listed work item marked ready to start. The tracker is complete when #217 and #218–#222 are closed or explicitly dropped with reasons, after which the milestone can close.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Domain
devtools
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Active
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.