Skill: athola/nm-imbue-review-core (version 1.0.2)

--- name: review-core description: | Reusable scaffolding for review workflows with context establishment, evidence capture, and structured output version: 1.9.5 triggers: - workflow - scaffolding - evidence - reporting - analysis metadata: {"openclaw": {"homepage": "https://github.com/athola/claude-night-market/tree/master/plugins/imbue", "emoji": "\ud83e\udd9e"}} source: claude-night-market source_plugin: imbue --- > **Night Market Skill** — ported from [claude-night-market/imbue](https://github.com/athola/claude-night-market/tree/master/plugins/imbue). For the full experience with agents, hooks, and commands, install the Claude Code plugin. # Core Review Workflow ## Table of Contents 1. [When to Use](#when-to-use) 2. [Activation Patterns](#activation-patterns) 3. [Required TodoWrite Items](#required-todowrite-items) 4. [Step 1 – Establish Context](#step-1--establish-context-review-corecontext-established) 5. [Step 2 – Inventory Scope](#step-2--inventory-scope-review-corescope-inventoried) 6. [Step 3 – Capture Evidence](#step-3--capture-evidence-review-coreevidence-captured) 7. [Step 4 – Structure Deliverables](#step-4--structure-deliverables-review-coredeliverables-structured) 8. [Step 5 – Contingency Plan](#step-5--contingency-plan-review-corecontingencies-documented) 9. [Troubleshooting](#troubleshooting) ## When To Use - Use this skill at the beginning of any detailed review workflow (e.g., for architecture, math, or an API). - It provides a consistent structure for capturing context, logging evidence, and formatting the final report, which makes the findings of different reviews comparable. ## When NOT To Use - Diff-focused analysis - use diff-analysis ## Activation Patterns **Trigger Keywords**: review, audit, analysis, assessment, evaluation, inspection **Contextual Cues**: - "review this code/design/architecture" - "conduct an audit of" - "analyze this for issues" - "evaluate the quality of" - "perform an assessment" **Auto-Load When**: Any review-specific workflow is detected or when analysis methodologies are requested. ## Required TodoWrite Items 1. `review-core:context-established` 2. `review-core:scope-inventoried` 3. `review-core:evidence-captured` 4. `review-core:deliverables-structured` 5. `review-core:contingencies-documented` ## Step 1 – Establish Context (`review-core:context-established`) - Confirm `pwd`, repo, branch, and upstream base (e.g., `git status -sb`, `git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD`). - Note comparison target (merge base, release tag) so later diffs reference a concrete range. - Summarize the feature/bug/initiative under review plus stakeholders and deadlines. ## Step 2 – Inventory Scope (`review-core:scope-inventoried`) - List relevant artifacts for this review: source files, configs, docs, specs, generated assets (OpenAPI, Makefiles, ADRs, notebooks, etc.). - Record how you enumerated them (commands like `rg --files -g '*.mk'`, `ls docs`, `cargo metadata`). - Capture assumptions or constraints inherited from the plan/issue so the domain-specific analysis can cite them. ## Step 3 – Capture Evidence (`review-core:evidence-captured`) - Log every command/output that informs the review (e.g., `git diff --stat`, `make -pn`, `cargo doc`, `web.run` citations). Keep snippets or line numbers for later reference. - Track open questions or variances found during preflight; if they block progress, record owners/timelines now. ## Step 4 – Structure Deliverables (`review-core:deliverables-structured`) - Prepare the reporting skeleton shared by all reviews: - Summary (baseline, scope, recommendation) - Ordered findings (severity, file:line, principle violated, remediation) - Follow-up tasks (owner + due date) - Evidence appendix (commands, URLs, notebooks) - validate the domain-specific checklist will populate each section before concluding. ## Step 5 – Contingency Plan (`review-core:contingencies-documented`) - If a required tool or skill is unavailable (e.g., `web.run`), document the alternative steps that will be taken and any limitations this introduces. This helps reviewers understand any gaps in coverage. - Note any outstanding approvals or data needed to complete the review. ## Exit Criteria - All TodoWrite items complete with concrete notes (commands run, files listed, evidence paths). - Domain-specific review can now assume consistent context/evidence/deliverable scaffolding and focus on specialized analysis. ## Troubleshooting ### Common Issues **Command not found** Ensure all dependencies are installed and in PATH **Permission errors** Check file permissions and run with appropriate privileges **Unexpected behavior** Enable verbose logging with `--verbose` flag


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: clean (LOW)