Fix then re review ladder

fix-then-re-review-ladder — recover NEEDS-WORK to CLEAN

Middle stage of the three-skill review pipeline: pr-review-fanout (bulk-runs the ladder across PRs and routes needs-work verdicts here) -> this skill (recovers a PR to CLEAN) -> operator-review (presents the clean result for human sign-off). This skill is a pure executor of the doctrine in lN-review-doctrine — it does not invent verdict schema or marker format, it reads and re-triggers what already exists.

Goal

Drive a PR whose posted review verdict is NEEDS-WORK or BLOCKING back to CLEAN at the tier that failed, then hand off to operator-review.

Prerequisite

A posted review marker at some tier — <!-- review:metadata --> (Change/L0), <!-- l1-review:metadata --> (Acceptance/L1), or <!-- l2-review:metadata --> (Objective/L2) — carrying a NEEDS-WORK or BLOCKING verdict. Read the marker per the "How the next layer reads the artifact" procedure in ../lN-review-doctrine/references/checklist.md: reviews API first, issue-comment mirror as fallback, sha-matched against current HEAD (never bare most-recent-wins — see that doctrine's "Marker currency" section). Never trust a local .claude/reviews/*.md cache as the source of truth — it is per-host and not readable across operators.

Steps

1. Identify tier + current HEAD. The failing marker names its level (0/1/2 -> Change/Acceptance/Objective) and its sha field — the exact revision it reviewed. Compare against git rev-parse HEAD on the PR branch: a verdict — CLEAN included — whose marker sha is older than current HEAD is stale. Treat a stale marker as if no review ran at that tier and restart the ladder against current HEAD rather than trusting it.
2. Extract findings from the posted marker's body — the per-axis Conformance/Process/Objective sections for L1/L2, the Blocking/Advisory sections for L0 — read fresh from the PR comment (per the Prerequisite), not from a local cache.
3. Triage each finding into fix-now (a real defect: any blocking finding, or a warning/info finding that is actually a correctness or scope-mismatch problem; fixing a fix-now item overrides a "don't touch X" guard if the task carried one) vs advisory/waivable (a warning/info finding the operator may accept as-is). Surface the split via one AskUserQuestion batch — one finding per question, each with a recommended default (fix-now findings default to "fix"; advisory findings default to "waive"). A finding that is structurally unfixable pre-merge (e.g. a check that only runs on the default branch) is neither fixed nor waived by this step — document it as a known residual now; do not hack around it later to force a green re-review.
4. Dispatch ONE scoped fix agent, right-sized (Sonnet by default; escalate the model only if the findings touch a load-bearing/doctrine-class surface). The fix agent is the sole finisher on the branch/worktree for this iteration — no parallel fix agents against the same PR, and no rescoping or redesign beyond what the triaged fix-now findings require. Unlike a reviewer, the fix agent is not bound by the reviewer read-only-worktree discipline in checklist.md ("Reviewer worktree discipline") — that constraint exists to protect a work product under independent evaluation; the fixer IS the author on its own branch, in its own worktree, and editing and committing there is exactly its job. If the branch has diverged from main, the fix agent rebases/resolves as part of its scoped fix; a divergence beyond a mechanical rebase is an escalation condition (below), not something to force through.
5. Push. The fix agent pushes its commit(s) to the PR's branch so the PR updates in place. Record the new HEAD SHA via TaskUpdate.
6. Re-run the SAME tier that failed, against the new HEAD, via a fresh independent agent — a new context window with no authoring trace of the fix, per the doctrine's reviewer-independence rule in checklist.md ("Reviewer independence"). This skill dispatches that agent; it does not run /review//l1-review//l2-review itself. The re-review posts its marker per the doctrine's find-or-update-by-marker protocol (update the existing comment for that marker type in place); a pre-fix review verdict never counts toward the new HEAD.
7. Loop or exit:
   • New verdict CLEAN -> stop looping; hand off to operator-review (its Prerequisite is all tier-warranted markers posted; this loop's exit condition is what makes them CLEAN by the time of handoff).
   • New verdict NEEDS-WORK/BLOCKING with new or narrowed findings -> back to step 2, triage the new marker.
   • An escalation condition below is met -> stop, do not loop further; surface to the operator.

Escalation — stop, don't loop forever

Escalate instead of dispatching another fix agent when any of:

• No forward progress: two consecutive re-reviews (each after its own fix attempt) report the same or overlapping findings.
• Iteration budget exhausted: 3 fix -> re-review iterations complete against this PR without reaching CLEAN. Default; an overridable parameter recorded here, not hardcoded doctrine — retune via a follow-up PR if it proves wrong in practice.
• Unfixable-pre-merge residual: a fix-now finding is structurally unfixable before merge (step 3) — document it, escalate rather than force a hack to get a green re-review.
• Branch divergence beyond a mechanical rebase: the fix agent reports a conflict it cannot resolve as sole finisher.
• Triage ambiguity: the AskUserQuestion response doesn't resolve the fix-now/waivable split (e.g. the operator wants to discuss rather than pick) and a second round doesn't close it either.

On escalation, report the tier, the residual findings, the iteration count, and what was tried — to the operator, or (when invoked by pr-review-fanout) back into that skill's per-PR tracking — and stop. Do not dispatch another fix agent past an escalation; a human decision is required to proceed.

Edge Cases

• Fix surfaces genuinely new findings the original review never saw -> loop (step 7, second bullet). This alone is not an escalation — only "no forward progress" or "budget exhausted" (above) force a stop.
• Operator waives an advisory finding -> record the waiver via TaskUpdate and proceed without a fix for that item; never silently drop it from the eventual report.
• Structurally unfixable pre-merge finding -> document, escalate; never hack around it to force a passing re-review.
• Fix conflicts with main -> the sole-finisher fix agent rebases; if that fails, escalate (branch-divergence condition above).
• Duplicate fix agent dispatched on the same PR (e.g. a race from a second invocation) -> keep the one already in flight as sole finisher and stop the other; two fix agents must never commit to the same branch concurrently.
• Stale marker -> always check the marker's sha field against current HEAD before trusting any verdict, CLEAN included (step 1). This holds on either posting surface — a stale BLOCKING event left behind on the append-only reviews API by a since-superseded re-review never survives this check (lN-review-doctrine's "Marker currency").
• Relationship to operator-review: this skill produces the clean state operator-review's Prerequisite consumes. It does not itself seek operator sign-off on the change's content — the only operator interaction here is the fix-now/waivable triage in step 3.

What this skill does NOT do

• Does not itself run /review, /l1-review, or /l2-review — it dispatches agents that do, and reads the markers those agents post.
• Does not merge, approve, or post the final sign-off — that is operator-review.
• Does not run more than one fix agent at a time against the same PR.
• Does not loop past an escalation condition without a human decision.

See also

• pr-review-fanout — dispatches this skill on a needs-work verdict from its bulk ladder run across multiple PRs; this skill reports its outcome back into that skill's per-PR tracking when invoked from it.
• operator-review — the next pipeline stage; its Prerequisite is the CLEAN state this skill produces.
• lN-review-doctrine (references/checklist.md) — the verdict/finding schema, the marker-emission template, the find-or-update-by-marker protocol, and the reviewer-independence / reviewer-worktree-discipline rules the agents this skill dispatches must follow.