605 lines
20 KiB
Markdown
605 lines
20 KiB
Markdown
# /sdd:story-review
|
||
|
||
## Meta
|
||
- Version: 2.0
|
||
- Category: quality-gates
|
||
- Complexity: high
|
||
- Purpose: Move story to review stage and execute comprehensive quality checks
|
||
|
||
## Definition
|
||
**Purpose**: Execute comprehensive code review with project-specific quality gates, linting, testing, security checks, and standards compliance before QA.
|
||
|
||
**Syntax**: `/sdd:story-review [story_id]`
|
||
|
||
## Parameters
|
||
| Parameter | Type | Required | Default | Description | Validation |
|
||
|-----------|------|----------|---------|-------------|------------|
|
||
| story_id | string | No | current branch | Story ID (STORY-YYYY-NNN) | Must match format STORY-YYYY-NNN |
|
||
|
||
## INSTRUCTION: Execute Story Review
|
||
|
||
### INPUTS
|
||
- story_id: Story identifier (auto-detected from branch if not provided)
|
||
- Project context from `/docs/project-context/` directory
|
||
- Story file from `/docs/stories/development/[story-id].md`
|
||
- Codebase changes since story started
|
||
|
||
### PROCESS
|
||
|
||
#### Phase 1: Project Context Loading
|
||
1. **CHECK** if `/docs/project-context/` directory exists
|
||
2. IF missing:
|
||
- SUGGEST running `/sdd:project-init` first
|
||
- EXIT with initialization guidance
|
||
3. **LOAD** project-specific review standards from:
|
||
- `/docs/project-context/technical-stack.md` - Technology stack and tools
|
||
- `/docs/project-context/coding-standards.md` - Quality standards and thresholds
|
||
- `/docs/project-context/development-process.md` - Review stage requirements
|
||
|
||
#### Phase 2: Story Identification & Validation
|
||
1. IF story_id NOT provided:
|
||
- **DETECT** current git branch
|
||
- **EXTRACT** story ID from branch name
|
||
- EXAMPLE: Branch `feature/STORY-2025-001-auth` → ID `STORY-2025-001`
|
||
|
||
2. **VALIDATE** story exists:
|
||
- CHECK `/docs/stories/development/[story-id].md` exists
|
||
- IF NOT found in development:
|
||
- CHECK if already in `/docs/stories/review/`
|
||
- INFORM user and ask to proceed with re-review
|
||
- IF NOT found anywhere:
|
||
- ERROR: "Story [story-id] not found"
|
||
- EXIT with guidance
|
||
|
||
3. **READ** story file for:
|
||
- Current status
|
||
- Implementation checklist state
|
||
- Acceptance criteria
|
||
- Technical approach
|
||
|
||
#### Phase 3: Directory Preparation
|
||
1. **ENSURE** `/docs/stories/review/` directory exists
|
||
- CREATE directory if missing
|
||
- ADD `.gitkeep` file if directory was created
|
||
|
||
2. **MOVE** story file:
|
||
- FROM: `/docs/stories/development/[story-id].md`
|
||
- TO: `/docs/stories/review/[story-id].md`
|
||
- PRESERVE all content and formatting
|
||
|
||
3. **UPDATE** story metadata:
|
||
- Change status from "development" to "review"
|
||
- KEEP existing dates and branch information
|
||
- ADD review start timestamp to progress log
|
||
|
||
#### Phase 4: Quality Gate Execution
|
||
|
||
##### 4.1 Linting & Formatting (Discovered Tools)
|
||
1. **IDENTIFY** linter from technical-stack.md:
|
||
- PHP/Laravel: `vendor/bin/pint`
|
||
- Node.js: ESLint, Prettier
|
||
- Python: Black, flake8, pylint
|
||
- Go: gofmt, golint
|
||
- Rust: rustfmt, clippy
|
||
|
||
2. **RUN** discovered linter:
|
||
```bash
|
||
# Example for Laravel:
|
||
vendor/bin/pint --dirty
|
||
|
||
# Example for Node.js:
|
||
npm run lint
|
||
npm run format
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
3. **CAPTURE** results:
|
||
- COUNT style violations
|
||
- IDENTIFY auto-fixable issues
|
||
- LIST files modified by auto-fix
|
||
- REPORT remaining manual fixes needed
|
||
|
||
##### 4.2 Testing (Discovered Framework)
|
||
1. **IDENTIFY** test framework from technical-stack.md:
|
||
- PHP/Laravel: Pest, PHPUnit
|
||
- Node.js: Jest, Vitest, Mocha
|
||
- Python: pytest, unittest
|
||
- Go: go test
|
||
- Java: JUnit, TestNG
|
||
|
||
2. **RUN** discovered test suite:
|
||
```bash
|
||
# Example for Laravel Pest:
|
||
vendor/bin/pest --coverage
|
||
|
||
# Example for Node.js:
|
||
npm test -- --coverage
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
3. **ANALYZE** test results:
|
||
- PASS/FAIL status for all test types
|
||
- Coverage percentage (unit, feature, browser)
|
||
- Identify untested code paths
|
||
- CHECK coverage meets standards from coding-standards.md
|
||
|
||
##### 4.3 Security Checks (Discovered Tools)
|
||
1. **IDENTIFY** security tools from technical-stack.md:
|
||
- PHP/Laravel: `composer audit`
|
||
- Node.js: `npm audit`, `yarn audit`
|
||
- Python: `safety check`, `bandit`
|
||
- Go: `go mod audit`, `gosec`
|
||
- Java: `mvn dependency-check`
|
||
|
||
2. **RUN** discovered security scanners:
|
||
```bash
|
||
# Example for Laravel:
|
||
composer audit
|
||
|
||
# Example for Node.js:
|
||
npm audit --production
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
3. **SCAN** for exposed secrets:
|
||
- CHECK for API keys, tokens, passwords
|
||
- VALIDATE environment variable usage
|
||
- REVIEW configuration files
|
||
|
||
4. **FRAMEWORK-SPECIFIC** security checks:
|
||
- Laravel: CSRF tokens, SQL injection prevention, XSS protection
|
||
- React: XSS via dangerouslySetInnerHTML, dependency vulnerabilities
|
||
- Express: Helmet middleware, rate limiting, input validation
|
||
|
||
##### 4.4 Dependencies Analysis (Discovered Package Manager)
|
||
1. **IDENTIFY** package manager from technical-stack.md:
|
||
- PHP: Composer
|
||
- Node.js: npm, yarn, pnpm
|
||
- Python: pip, poetry
|
||
- Go: go modules
|
||
- Rust: cargo
|
||
|
||
2. **CHECK** for unused dependencies:
|
||
```bash
|
||
# Example for Node.js:
|
||
npx depcheck
|
||
|
||
# Example for PHP:
|
||
composer show --tree
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
3. **IDENTIFY** outdated packages:
|
||
```bash
|
||
# Example for Laravel:
|
||
composer outdated
|
||
|
||
# Example for Node.js:
|
||
npm outdated
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
4. **ANALYZE** bundle size impact (if frontend):
|
||
- MEASURE before/after bundle sizes
|
||
- IDENTIFY large dependencies
|
||
- SUGGEST optimization opportunities
|
||
|
||
##### 4.5 Standards Compliance (Discovered Coding Standards)
|
||
1. **LOAD** naming conventions from coding-standards.md
|
||
2. **LOAD** file organization patterns
|
||
3. **LOAD** error handling requirements
|
||
4. **LOAD** performance guidelines
|
||
|
||
5. **FRAMEWORK-SPECIFIC** compliance checks:
|
||
- **React**: Component structure, hooks rules, prop-types/TypeScript
|
||
- **Vue**: Composition API patterns, template conventions, ref naming
|
||
- **Laravel**: Eloquent usage, Blade conventions, Livewire patterns, route naming
|
||
- **Django**: Model/View/Template patterns, DRF conventions, ORM best practices
|
||
- **Express**: Middleware patterns, route organization, error handling
|
||
|
||
6. **VALIDATE** against standards:
|
||
- CHECK naming conventions (files, functions, variables)
|
||
- VERIFY file organization matches project structure
|
||
- ENSURE error handling follows patterns
|
||
- CONFIRM performance guidelines met
|
||
|
||
##### 4.6 Accessibility Checks (If UI Changes)
|
||
1. **DETECT** if story includes UI changes
|
||
2. IF UI changes present:
|
||
- **CHECK** for ARIA labels per coding-standards.md
|
||
- **VERIFY** keyboard navigation support
|
||
- **TEST** color contrast ratios (WCAG AA/AAA)
|
||
- **VALIDATE** semantic HTML usage
|
||
- **CHECK** screen reader compatibility
|
||
|
||
3. **FRAMEWORK-SPECIFIC** accessibility:
|
||
- React: jsx-a11y rules, focus management
|
||
- Vue: Template accessibility, v-focus directive
|
||
- Laravel Livewire: wire:loading states, wire:target accessibility
|
||
|
||
#### Phase 5: Report Generation
|
||
1. **COMPILE** all check results
|
||
2. **GENERATE** review report:
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
📊 CODE REVIEW REPORT
|
||
════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||
Story: [STORY-ID] - [Title]
|
||
Stack: [Discovered Framework/Language/Tools]
|
||
Reviewed: [Timestamp]
|
||
|
||
✅ PASSED CHECKS:
|
||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||
[Linting]
|
||
✓ Laravel Pint: All files formatted (X files checked)
|
||
✓ No style violations found
|
||
|
||
[Testing]
|
||
✓ Pest tests: XX/XX passed
|
||
✓ Unit coverage: XX% (target: YY% from standards)
|
||
✓ Feature coverage: XX% (target: YY% from standards)
|
||
✓ Browser coverage: XX% (target: YY% from standards)
|
||
|
||
[Security]
|
||
✓ Composer audit: No vulnerabilities
|
||
✓ No exposed secrets detected
|
||
✓ CSRF protection implemented
|
||
|
||
[Dependencies]
|
||
✓ No unused dependencies
|
||
✓ All packages up to date
|
||
|
||
[Standards]
|
||
✓ Naming conventions followed
|
||
✓ File organization matches project structure
|
||
✓ Error handling implemented
|
||
✓ Performance guidelines met
|
||
|
||
[Accessibility] (if UI)
|
||
✓ ARIA labels present
|
||
✓ Keyboard navigation functional
|
||
✓ Color contrast: WCAG AA compliant
|
||
|
||
⚠️ WARNINGS:
|
||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||
[Dependencies]
|
||
⚠ Package "X" has minor update available (current: 1.2.3, latest: 1.2.4)
|
||
⚠ Bundle size increased by XKB (+Y%)
|
||
|
||
[Performance]
|
||
⚠ Method X complexity is high (cyclomatic complexity: N)
|
||
|
||
❌ FAILURES:
|
||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||
[Testing]
|
||
✗ Coverage below threshold: 75% (target: 80%)
|
||
✗ Missing tests for: ErrorHandlingService.handleTimeout()
|
||
|
||
[Security]
|
||
✗ High severity vulnerability in package "Y" (CVE-2024-XXXX)
|
||
|
||
📈 METRICS:
|
||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||
Test Coverage: XX% (target: YY% from standards)
|
||
Code Quality Score: X/10 (using discovered metrics)
|
||
Bundle Size Impact: +XKB (+Y%)
|
||
Performance Score: X/100 (using discovered tools)
|
||
Complexity Score: X (average cyclomatic complexity)
|
||
|
||
🔧 SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS:
|
||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||
[Laravel-specific]
|
||
→ Consider eager loading to prevent N+1 queries in TaskController
|
||
→ Extract complex query logic to repository pattern
|
||
→ Add database indexes for frequently queried columns
|
||
|
||
[Performance]
|
||
→ Cache expensive computations in method X
|
||
→ Lazy load heavy components
|
||
|
||
[Testing]
|
||
→ Add browser test for error scenario in feature Y
|
||
→ Increase coverage for edge cases in service Z
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
#### Phase 6: Story File Updates
|
||
1. **UPDATE** Implementation Checklist based on review:
|
||
- `[x]` Feature implementation - IF core functionality complete
|
||
- `[x]` Unit tests - IF tests pass AND coverage meets standards
|
||
- `[x]` Integration tests - IF integration tests pass
|
||
- `[x]` Error handling - IF error scenarios properly handled
|
||
- `[x]` Loading states - IF UI loading states implemented
|
||
- `[x]` Performance optimization - IF performance requirements met
|
||
- `[x]` Accessibility - IF accessibility standards met
|
||
- `[x]` Security review - IF security checks pass
|
||
|
||
2. **ADD** to Progress Log:
|
||
```markdown
|
||
- [Today]: Moved to review stage
|
||
- [Today]: Executed quality gates - [PASSED/FAILED]
|
||
* Linting: [status]
|
||
* Testing: [status] - [XX]% coverage
|
||
* Security: [status]
|
||
* Standards: [status]
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
3. **RECORD** review results:
|
||
- Which tools were used
|
||
- Which standards were applied
|
||
- Coverage percentages achieved
|
||
- Issues found and resolution status
|
||
|
||
4. **ONLY** mark items `[x]` if they truly pass review criteria
|
||
- BE STRICT with validation
|
||
- PARTIAL completion = NOT checked
|
||
- MUST meet coding-standards.md thresholds
|
||
|
||
#### Phase 7: Next Actions
|
||
1. **DETERMINE** review outcome:
|
||
- IF all critical checks PASS → Ready for `/sdd:story-qa`
|
||
- IF any failures → Requires `/sdd:story-refactor`
|
||
- IF documentation needed → Run `/sdd:story-document`
|
||
|
||
2. **DISPLAY** next steps:
|
||
```
|
||
💡 NEXT STEPS:
|
||
════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||
|
||
[IF PASSED:]
|
||
✅ All quality gates passed
|
||
1. /sdd:story-qa [story-id] # Move to QA and run test suite
|
||
|
||
[IF FAILED:]
|
||
⚠️ X critical issues must be fixed
|
||
1. /sdd:story-refactor [story-id] # Return to development
|
||
2. Fix identified issues:
|
||
- [Issue 1]
|
||
- [Issue 2]
|
||
3. /sdd:story-review [story-id] # Re-run review after fixes
|
||
|
||
[IF WARNINGS:]
|
||
⚠️ X warnings (non-blocking)
|
||
1. /sdd:story-qa [story-id] # Proceed to QA (warnings won't block)
|
||
2. Consider addressing warnings in future iteration
|
||
|
||
[AVAILABLE COMMANDS:]
|
||
- /sdd:story-document [story-id] # Add/update documentation
|
||
- /sdd:story-status [story-id] # View detailed story status
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
3. **SHOW** relevant debugging commands for discovered stack:
|
||
```bash
|
||
# Laravel:
|
||
vendor/bin/pint --test # Check formatting without fixing
|
||
vendor/bin/pest --filter=Unit # Run specific test suite
|
||
composer audit # Re-run security scan
|
||
|
||
# Node.js:
|
||
npm run lint:fix # Auto-fix linting issues
|
||
npm test -- --coverage # Run tests with coverage
|
||
npm audit fix # Fix security vulnerabilities
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### OUTPUTS
|
||
- `/docs/stories/review/[story-id].md` - Updated story file with review results
|
||
- Code review report (displayed to user)
|
||
- Updated Implementation Checklist with validation status
|
||
- Progress log entry with review timestamp
|
||
|
||
### RULES
|
||
- MUST load project context before running any checks
|
||
- MUST use discovered tools from technical-stack.md
|
||
- MUST validate against coding-standards.md thresholds
|
||
- MUST move story file from development to review
|
||
- SHOULD run all applicable quality gates for stack
|
||
- SHOULD capture detailed metrics for analysis
|
||
- NEVER mark checklist items complete unless they truly pass
|
||
- NEVER skip security checks
|
||
- ALWAYS update progress log with review results
|
||
- ALWAYS provide actionable feedback for failures
|
||
|
||
## Examples
|
||
|
||
### Example 1: Review with All Checks Passing
|
||
```bash
|
||
INPUT:
|
||
/sdd:story-review STORY-2025-001
|
||
|
||
OUTPUT:
|
||
→ Loading project context...
|
||
✓ technical-stack.md: Laravel + Pest + Playwright
|
||
✓ coding-standards.md: 80% coverage target, Laravel Pint
|
||
✓ development-process.md: Review stage requirements
|
||
|
||
→ Moving story to review...
|
||
✓ Moved STORY-2025-001.md to /docs/stories/review/
|
||
|
||
→ Running quality gates...
|
||
[Linting] Running Laravel Pint...
|
||
✓ 15 files formatted, 0 violations
|
||
|
||
[Testing] Running Pest...
|
||
✓ Unit tests: 45/45 passed
|
||
✓ Feature tests: 23/23 passed
|
||
✓ Browser tests: 8/8 passed
|
||
✓ Coverage: 87% (target: 80%)
|
||
|
||
[Security] Running Composer audit...
|
||
✓ No vulnerabilities found
|
||
✓ No exposed secrets
|
||
|
||
[Standards] Checking Laravel conventions...
|
||
✓ Eloquent usage follows best practices
|
||
✓ Livewire patterns correct
|
||
✓ Blade conventions followed
|
||
|
||
📊 CODE REVIEW REPORT
|
||
════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||
Story: STORY-2025-001 - User Authentication System
|
||
Stack: Laravel 12, Livewire 3, Pest 4, Playwright
|
||
Reviewed: 2025-10-01 14:23:45
|
||
|
||
✅ ALL CHECKS PASSED
|
||
|
||
📈 METRICS:
|
||
Test Coverage: 87% (target: 80%)
|
||
Code Quality Score: 9.2/10
|
||
Bundle Size Impact: +12KB (+3%)
|
||
Performance Score: 94/100
|
||
|
||
💡 NEXT STEPS:
|
||
════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||
✅ All quality gates passed
|
||
1. /sdd:story-qa STORY-2025-001 # Move to QA and run test suite
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Example 2: Review with Failures
|
||
```bash
|
||
INPUT:
|
||
/sdd:story-review
|
||
|
||
OUTPUT:
|
||
→ Detecting story from current branch...
|
||
✓ Current branch: feature/STORY-2025-003-dark-mode
|
||
✓ Story ID: STORY-2025-003
|
||
|
||
→ Loading project context...
|
||
✓ technical-stack.md: Laravel + Pest + Playwright
|
||
✓ coding-standards.md: 80% coverage target
|
||
|
||
→ Moving story to review...
|
||
✓ Moved STORY-2025-003.md to /docs/stories/review/
|
||
|
||
→ Running quality gates...
|
||
[Testing] Running Pest...
|
||
✓ Unit tests: 12/12 passed
|
||
✗ Feature tests: 4/5 passed (1 failed)
|
||
✓ Browser tests: 3/3 passed
|
||
✗ Coverage: 68% (target: 80%)
|
||
|
||
[Security] Running Composer audit...
|
||
✗ 1 high severity vulnerability found
|
||
|
||
📊 CODE REVIEW REPORT
|
||
════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||
Story: STORY-2025-003 - Dark Mode Toggle
|
||
Stack: Laravel 12, Livewire 3, Pest 4
|
||
Reviewed: 2025-10-01 15:45:12
|
||
|
||
❌ FAILURES:
|
||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||
[Testing]
|
||
✗ Coverage below threshold: 68% (target: 80%)
|
||
✗ Missing tests for: DarkModeService.applyTheme()
|
||
✗ Feature test failed: tests/Feature/DarkModeTest.php
|
||
|
||
[Security]
|
||
✗ High severity vulnerability in package "laravel/framework"
|
||
CVE-2024-12345 - Update to v12.1.5
|
||
|
||
💡 NEXT STEPS:
|
||
════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||
⚠️ 3 critical issues must be fixed
|
||
1. /sdd:story-refactor STORY-2025-003 # Return to development
|
||
2. Fix identified issues:
|
||
- Add tests for DarkModeService.applyTheme()
|
||
- Fix failing feature test
|
||
- Update Laravel framework to v12.1.5
|
||
3. /sdd:story-review STORY-2025-003 # Re-run review after fixes
|
||
|
||
[DEBUGGING COMMANDS:]
|
||
vendor/bin/pest --filter=DarkMode # Run specific test
|
||
composer update laravel/framework # Update vulnerable package
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Example 3: Re-review Already in Review
|
||
```bash
|
||
INPUT:
|
||
/sdd:story-review STORY-2025-002
|
||
|
||
OUTPUT:
|
||
→ Loading project context...
|
||
✓ technical-stack.md loaded
|
||
|
||
→ Validating story location...
|
||
⚠️ Story STORY-2025-002 already in review stage
|
||
ℹ️ Running re-review with updated checks
|
||
|
||
→ Running quality gates...
|
||
[All checks execute...]
|
||
|
||
📊 CODE REVIEW REPORT (RE-REVIEW)
|
||
════════════════════════════════════════════════
|
||
Story: STORY-2025-002 - Payment Integration
|
||
Stack: Laravel 12, Stripe SDK
|
||
Reviewed: 2025-10-01 16:12:33 (2nd review)
|
||
|
||
✅ ALL CHECKS PASSED
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
## Edge Cases
|
||
|
||
### No Project Context
|
||
- DETECT missing `/docs/project-context/` directory
|
||
- SUGGEST running `/sdd:project-init`
|
||
- OFFER to run basic checks without discovered standards
|
||
- WARN that review will be incomplete
|
||
|
||
### Story Not in Development
|
||
- CHECK if story in `/docs/stories/review/`
|
||
- IF found: ASK user if they want to re-review
|
||
- IF in `/docs/stories/qa/`: ERROR and suggest `/sdd:story-refactor` first
|
||
- IF in `/docs/stories/completed/`: ERROR "Story already shipped"
|
||
|
||
### Missing Test Framework
|
||
- DETECT if testing tool not installed
|
||
- PROVIDE installation instructions for discovered stack
|
||
- SKIP test checks with warning
|
||
- MARK review as INCOMPLETE
|
||
|
||
### Security Vulnerabilities Found
|
||
- BLOCK progression to QA if HIGH/CRITICAL severity
|
||
- ALLOW progression if LOW/MEDIUM with warning
|
||
- PROVIDE update/fix commands
|
||
- LOG all vulnerabilities in review report
|
||
|
||
### Coverage Below Threshold
|
||
- CALCULATE gap to target (e.g., 68% vs 80% = 12% gap)
|
||
- IDENTIFY specific untested files/methods
|
||
- SUGGEST test cases to add
|
||
- BLOCK progression if below threshold
|
||
|
||
### Tool Execution Failures
|
||
- CATCH and log tool errors
|
||
- CONTINUE with remaining checks
|
||
- MARK affected section as INCOMPLETE
|
||
- SUGGEST manual verification
|
||
|
||
## Error Handling
|
||
- **Missing /docs/project-context/**: Suggest `/sdd:project-init`, offer basic review
|
||
- **Story file not found**: Check all directories, provide helpful guidance
|
||
- **Tool not installed**: Provide installation commands for stack
|
||
- **Permission errors**: Report specific file/directory access issue
|
||
- **Git errors**: Validate git state, suggest resolution
|
||
- **Test failures**: Capture full output, suggest debugging steps
|
||
|
||
## Performance Considerations
|
||
- Run linting/formatting in parallel with security scans
|
||
- Cache project context for session (don't re-read every time)
|
||
- Stream test output in real-time (don't wait for completion)
|
||
- Limit coverage analysis to changed files when possible
|
||
|
||
## Related Commands
|
||
- `/sdd:story-refactor [id]` - Return to development to fix issues
|
||
- `/sdd:story-qa [id]` - Proceed to QA after passing review
|
||
- `/sdd:story-document [id]` - Add documentation before QA
|
||
- `/sdd:story-status [id]` - Check current story state
|
||
- `/sdd:project-context` - Update project standards
|
||
|
||
## Constraints
|
||
- ✅ MUST load project context before any checks
|
||
- ✅ MUST move story file to review directory
|
||
- ✅ MUST run all applicable quality gates
|
||
- ✅ MUST validate against coding-standards.md
|
||
- ⚠️ NEVER skip security checks
|
||
- ⚠️ NEVER mark checklist items complete without validation
|
||
- 📋 SHOULD provide actionable feedback for all failures
|
||
- 🔧 SHOULD suggest framework-specific improvements
|
||
- 💾 MUST update progress log with timestamp
|
||
- 🚫 BLOCK QA progression if critical checks fail
|