agentsclimarketplace

Nw par review criteria

Skill nWave-ai/nWave/nWave/skills/nw-par-review-criteria

AI agents that guide you from idea to working code, with you in control at every step.

Install
npx -y skills add nWave-ai/nWave --skill nw-par-review-criteria

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Quality dimensions and review checklist for devop reviews

SKILL.md

4.2 KB, 828 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

DevOp Reviewer: Review Criteria

Critique Dimension 1: Incomplete Phase Handoffs

Pattern: Phase handoffs missing required artifacts or approvals.

Required per Phase:

  • DISCUSS: Requirements document + peer review approval
  • DESIGN: Architecture document + ADRs + peer review approval
  • DISTILL: Acceptance tests + peer review approval
  • DELIVER: Production code + tests (100% passing) + peer review approval

Severity: critical. Verify all artifacts present and peer-reviewed before phase transition.

Critique Dimension 2: Deployment Readiness Gaps

Pattern: Feature marked "ready" but missing production prerequisites.

Required: All tests passing (100%) | Production configuration complete | Monitoring/alerting configured | Runbook/operational docs created | Rollback plan documented.

Severity: critical. Complete missing prerequisite before marking deployment-ready.

Critique Dimension 3: Traceability Violations

Pattern: Cannot trace production code back to requirements.

Required: User stories map to acceptance tests | Acceptance tests map to production code | Code changes traceable to commits | All AC verified in production.

Severity: high. Establish traceability chain: user-story -> acceptance-tests -> code-commits.

Critique Dimension 4: Priority Validation

Purpose: Validate roadmap addresses largest bottleneck first, not secondary concern.

Questions

Q1: Is this the largest bottleneck? Does timing data show primary problem? Larger problem being ignored? Assessment: YES / NO / UNCLEAR.

Q2: Were simpler alternatives considered? Roadmap includes rejected alternatives? Rejection reasons evidence-based? Simpler solution achieves 80% benefit? Assessment: ADEQUATE / INADEQUATE / MISSING.

Q3: Is constraint prioritization correct? Constraints quantified by impact? Architecture addresses constraint-free opportunities first? Minority constraint dominating? (flag if >50% of solution for <30% of problem). Assessment: CORRECT / INVERTED / NOT_ANALYZED.

Q4: Is architecture data-justified? Key architectural decision supported by quantitative data? Different data leads to different architecture? Assessment: JUSTIFIED / UNJUSTIFIED / NO_DATA.

Failure Conditions

  • FAIL if Q1 = NO (wrong problem being addressed)
  • FAIL if Q2 = MISSING (no alternatives considered)
  • FAIL if Q3 = INVERTED (minority constraint dominating)
  • FAIL if Q4 = NO_DATA and this is performance optimization

Critique Dimension 5: Functional Integration

Purpose: Verify feature wired into system entry point -- prevents Testing Theatre. A feature with 100% test coverage but 0% wiring tests is not complete.

Validation Criteria:

  1. Wiring test exists: at least one acceptance test invokes feature through driving port
  2. Component integrated: implemented component called from entry point module
  3. Boundary correct: acceptance tests do not import internal components directly

Gate failure response: Block finalization | report specific integration gap with evidence | require integration step before completion.

Quality Gate Checklist

Technical Completion

  • All acceptance tests passing with stakeholder validation
  • Unit test coverage meeting project standards (>=80%)
  • Integration test validation of cross-component functionality
  • Code review completed with approval
  • Static analysis and security scan passed
  • Performance tested under realistic load

Architecture Compliance

  • Implementation aligns with architectural design
  • Component boundaries and interfaces respected
  • Security architecture implemented correctly

Production Readiness

  • Monitoring and alerting configured
  • Logging and debugging capability validated
  • Rollback procedure documented and tested
  • Operational runbook complete
  • Support team trained / knowledge transferred

Business Completion

  • All user stories completed with acceptance criteria met
  • Business rules implemented and validated
  • Stakeholder acceptance obtained

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.