---

name: issue-creation-review description: Verifies Trellis issues against original requirements for completeness, correctness, and appropriate scope. Use when asked to "verify issue", "validate trellis issue", "check issue completeness", or "review created issue". context: fork agent: general-purpose allowed-tools:

• Glob
• Grep
• LS
• Read
• WebFetch
• WebSearch
• TodoWrite
• AskUserQuestion
• mcp__task-trellis__get_issue
• mcp__task-trellis__list_issues

---

Issue Creation Review

Verify that a created Trellis issue accurately reflects original requirements without over-engineering or missing critical elements.

Required Inputs

• Original Requirements: The initial request or specifications
• Created Issue: The issue ID or full issue details
• Additional Context (optional): Clarifications or decisions made during creation

Asking Questions

When in doubt, ask. If required inputs are missing or unclear, use AskUserQuestion to gather what you need before proceeding. Don't make assumptions about requirements - ask for clarification instead.

Verification Process

1. Research Codebase Context

Before evaluating, investigate the existing system:

• Search for similar implementations to verify consistency
• Check architectural patterns used in the codebase
• Identify existing utilities/libraries that should be leveraged
• Verify integration points mentioned are valid

2. Completeness Check

Verify all required elements are present.

Common to all issue types:

• All functional requirements from input are addressed
• Acceptance criteria are measurable and complete
• Dependencies/integration points are identified

Type-specific additions:

3. Correctness Check

• Technical Accuracy: Proposed solutions align with codebase patterns
• Requirement Alignment: Interpretation matches user intent
• Feasibility: Approach is technically viable
• Consistency: Aligns with existing system architecture

4. Scope Assessment

Evaluate for over-engineering:

• Identify additions beyond the original request
• Flag unnecessary complexity or premature optimization
• Ensure abstractions are justified by actual requirements

Exception: Expanded scope is acceptable if explicitly requested (e.g., "comprehensive" or "future-proofed" solution).

Output

Provide a verification report covering:

1. Issue Details: Type, ID, title
2. Completeness: Complete/Partial/Incomplete with specific gaps
3. Correctness: Correct/Issues Found with specific findings and codebase alignment
4. Scope: Appropriate/Over-engineered with analysis of what was requested vs. created
5. Recommendations: Critical issues and suggested improvements
6. Verdict: APPROVED / NEEDS REVISION / REJECTED with summary

Use codebase evidence to support findings. Flag over-engineering only when it adds complexity without benefit.