---

name: review-criteria description: Criteria for reviewing Codex worker outputs across 5 dimensions. Use when reviewing code submitted by workers before approval.

Review Criteria Skill

This skill defines how the CEO (Claude) reviews outputs from Codex workers.

Review Framework

Every Codex output must be reviewed across 5 dimensions:

1. Completeness (Required)

Question: Did the worker do what was asked?

Checklist:

• All files in task specification were created/modified
• The "Do" instruction was followed
• Output contains completion signal (TASK_COMPLETE)

Fail Conditions:

• Missing files that were specified
• Partial implementation with TODO comments
• No completion signal

2. Acceptance Criteria (Required)

Question: Does the output meet all acceptance criteria?

Process:

CopyFor each acceptance criterion in the task:

- [ ] AC-1: {criterion} → PASS/FAIL: {reason}
- [ ] AC-2: {criterion} → PASS/FAIL: {reason}
- [ ] AC-3: {criterion} → PASS/FAIL: {reason}

Criteria Met: {passed}/{total}

Fail Conditions:

• Any P0/P1 criterion fails
• More than 50% of criteria fail

3. Code Quality (Required)

Question: Is the code well-written?

Fail Conditions:

• Doesn't follow existing patterns
• Contains obvious bugs
• Missing critical error handling
• Security vulnerability present

4. Integration (Required)

Question: Will this work with existing code?

Checklist:

• Imports are correct and exist
• Exports match expected interface
• No circular dependencies
• Types are compatible (if TypeScript)

Fail Conditions:

• Broken imports
• Type mismatches
• Circular dependency introduced

5. Completeness of Output (Optional)

Question: Is the output complete and usable?

Checklist:

• No placeholder comments (// TODO, // FIXME)
• No incomplete implementations
• No ... or ellipsis in code
• File contents are complete

Fail Conditions:

• Contains placeholder code
• Implementation is skeletal

Review Decision Matrix

Writing Review Feedback

For APPROVED

Copy## Review: Task {id} - APPROVED ✓

All criteria met. Output is ready for verification.

**Summary**:
- Completeness: PASS
- Acceptance: {n}/{n} criteria met
- Quality: Good
- Integration: Compatible

For NEEDS_REVISION

Copy## Review: Task {id} - NEEDS_REVISION ↻

Attempt {n} of {max}. Issues found:

**Issue 1**: {Specific issue}
- File: {path}
- Line: {number} (if applicable)
- Current: {what's wrong}
- Expected: {what's needed}
- Fix: {specific instruction}

**Issue 2**: {Specific issue}
- Fix: {specific instruction}

**Focus Areas for Retry**:
1. {Priority 1}
2. {Priority 2}

For ESCALATE

Copy## Review: Task {id} - ESCALATE ⚠️

Max retries ({max}) reached or blocking issue found.

**Reason for Escalation**: {why}

**Attempts Summary**:
| Attempt | Issue | Feedback Given |
|---------|-------|----------------|
| 1 | {issue} | {feedback} |
| 2 | {issue} | {feedback} |
| 3 | {issue} | {feedback} |

**Options for User**:
1. Provide additional guidance and retry
2. Manually implement this task
3. Skip this task (if [OPTIONAL])
4. Modify requirements

Quality Standards

Code Pattern Matching

When reviewing, compare against:

1. Files in the same directory
2. Similar components/functions in codebase
3. Patterns specified in design.md
4. Project style guide (if exists)

Common Issues to Watch For

JavaScript/TypeScript:

• Missing async/await
• Unhandled promise rejections
• Incorrect this binding
• Missing type annotations

React:

• Missing key props in lists
• Direct state mutation
• Missing dependency arrays in hooks
• Memory leaks (missing cleanup)

API/Backend:

• Missing input validation
• SQL injection risks
• Missing authentication checks
• Improper error responses

Iteration Limits