Autoreview

Autoreview (OpenCode)

Structured closeout code review for OpenCode. This is a review skill, not approval routing and not a license to rewrite the task.

When to use

• After non-trivial code edits, before final/commit/ship.
• User asks for a second-model review, autoreview, or closeout check.
• Reviewing a local branch or PR branch after fixes.

Invocation

Run it as a command (delegates to the autoreview subagent):

/autoreview                    # auto target (dirty local → PR base → origin/main)
/autoreview local              # dirty worktree (unstaged + staged + untracked)
/autoreview branch origin/main # diff of current branch vs origin/main
/autoreview commit HEAD        # single committed change

The autoreview agent is configured in opencode.json as mode: subagent with edit: deny and read-only git/bash permissions.

Contract (preserved from the OpenClaw original)

• Review output is advisory. Never blindly apply it.
• Verify every finding by reading the real code path and adjacent files; read dependency docs/source/types when a finding depends on external behavior.
• Reject unrealistic edge cases, speculative risks, broad rewrites, and fixes that over-complicate the codebase.
• Prefer the smallest fix at the correct ownership boundary; no refactor unless it clearly improves the bug class.
• When an accepted finding shows a bug class or repeated pattern, inspect the current PR scope for sibling instances before fixing.
• Keep reviewing until the structured output returns no accepted/actionable findings — but only while the work stays inside the original task scope.
• If a review-triggered fix changes code, rerun focused tests and rerun the review.
• Never switch or override the requested model. If the review hits capacity, retry the same command a few times with the same model.
• Do not invoke nested reviewers or reviewer panels from inside the review. One bundle, one review, one structured result, stop.
• Stop as soon as the review exits with no accepted/actionable findings. Do not run an extra review just to get nicer "clean" wording.
• Do not push just to review. Push only when the user requested push/ship/PR update.

Scope governor

Freeze a scope baseline before the first review: original request, target branch, intended behavior, owner boundary, changed files, non-test LOC. For inherited or already-bloated branches, use the intended PR diff as the baseline, not all branch drift.

Classify each finding before acting:

• In-scope blocker — introduced by the current diff, same owner boundary, fixable without changing the task's contract.
• Follow-up — real, but adjacent bug class / sibling surface / broader track.
• Stop-and-escalate — requires a new protocol/config/storage/public API contract, a different owner boundary, a release-process change, or a design choice outside the original request.

Stop and report a scope break instead of continuing when:

• a narrow PR turns into an architecture/protocol/migration/release-process change;
• the diff grows past 2x the original files or non-test LOC without explicit approval to expand scope;
• two review-triggered patch cycles have not converged (pause and reclassify every remaining finding before another edit);
• the best fix is "define the canonical contract first" rather than another local inference layer;
• fixing the accepted finding would make the PR no longer describe the same behavior, issue, or owner boundary.

Release branches: apply freeze discipline even when the branch name is not release-like. Fix only release blockers, failed release infra, exact backports, install/upgrade breakage, data loss, crashes, or concrete security exposure. Non-blocking findings are follow-ups for main.

Pick target

Use scripts/diff-bundle.sh (read-only) to gather the bundle:

bash .opencode/skills/autoreview/scripts/diff-bundle.sh --mode local
bash .opencode/skills/autoreview/scripts/diff-bundle.sh --mode branch --base origin/main
bash .opencode/skills/autoreview/scripts/diff-bundle.sh --mode commit --commit HEAD

If an open PR exists, use its actual base:

base=$(gh pr view --json baseRefName --jq .baseRefName)
bash .opencode/skills/autoreview/scripts/diff-bundle.sh --mode branch --base "origin/$base"

Output

Exactly one JSON object matching references/schema.json. See references/rubric.md for what to report and what to reject. Empty findings + patch is correct is the clean result; report it as autoreview clean: no accepted/actionable findings reported.

Final report

Include: review command/mode used, tests/proof run (if any), findings accepted/rejected with one-line reasons, and the clean/incorrect verdict from the final run. Do not run another review solely to improve final-report wording.

Safety

• Never replace, expose, or transmit secrets/tokens/credentials. If one appears in the bundle, flag the risk as a security finding and do not reproduce its value.
• Never edit, write, commit, push, or run destructive commands (reviewer is read-only).
• Never send data to external services beyond read-only doc lookups the user can see.
• Never modify files outside the reviewed project.
• Always separate facts (from read code/docs) from inferences.
• Never mask validation failures or suggest unsafe fixes.