review-findings

Built-in skill. kanbot init installs it in .agents/skills/review-findings/SKILL.md. See Skills. Source.

Frontmatter

Field	Value
name	review-findings
description	Severity rubric, finding format and re-review rounds for kanbot reviews. Use when writing review findings, deciding severity, or judging whether a fixer resolved a finding.

---

Review findings

kanbot turns findings into a fix loop. Severity decides what gets fixed, so get it right.

Severity

Severity	Meaning	Triggers a fix
blocker	Wrong behaviour on a main path, data loss, security hole, failing checks, unmet acceptance criterion	Yes
major	Bug users will hit, missing test for a criterion, missed required capability, risky scope creep	Yes
minor	Real but low impact: unclear naming, small duplication, rare edge case untested	Yes
nit	Preference or polish. At most 3 per review	No

When unsure between two levels, pick the lower one and say the risk.

Writing a finding

Location, what is wrong, why it matters, the fix. One to three sentences.

src/invoices/service.ts:84 — total is summed before discounts, so discounted invoices show the full amount (criterion 3). Apply discounts first and add a test with a 10% code.

• One problem per finding. Merge repeats into one finding with all locations.
• Point at the line in the new version of the file. path and line null for cross-cutting findings.
• Show a failure ("a user with no projects gets a 500"), not a principle ("not robust").
• Only what you checked. If unsure, say what would confirm it.

Avoid

• More than ~10 findings. Keep the most important; summarise the rest in one.
• Style a formatter or linter covers.
• Scope beyond the plan. Suggest a follow-up issue as a nit at most.
• Rewriting a working approach to your taste without a concrete defect.
• Approving with an open blocker or major.

Verdict

changes with any blocker or major; otherwise approve. Minor findings and nits may come with an approval.

Re-review rounds

For each earlier finding: fixed (drop it), not fixed (repeat with the same id and what is still wrong), or the fixer disagreed (accept the reason, or explain once more why it matters). Check that fixes didn't add new problems.