Review gate

Review Gate

Output order

1. Findings first, sorted by severity.
2. For each finding include:
   • severity
   • file and line
   • risk/impact
   • concrete fix
3. Test quality findings (see audit below).
4. Missing-test findings explicitly.
5. Only then provide short summary and residual risks.

Test quality audit (mandatory)

Follow the assertion hierarchy and mock rules defined in the policy-core skill.

For every test file the change touches, and every test file covering a changed source file, evaluate:

Check 1: Wiring-only tests

Scan for tests where the ONLY assertions are Level 6-7 (wiring) per the policy-core assertion hierarchy. If a test has NO assertion on return values, thrown errors, formatted output, DB state, or other observable behavior — flag it as High severity: wiring-only test.

Check 2: Mock boundary violations

Apply the mock rules from policy-core. Flag tests that mock internal modules, pure functions, or types/schemas. See policy-core for the full list of acceptable vs. unacceptable mock targets.

Check 3: Security verification method

Flag security tests that verify config via mock call args:

// FLAG THIS:
expect(callArgs.HostConfig.ReadonlyRootfs).toBe(true);
// when callArgs comes from a mock, not from inspecting a real resource

Security properties must be verified via integration tests or by inspecting the actual resource.

Check 4: Unreliable coverage ignore directives

Scan source files for /* v8 ignore next */ or /* v8 ignore next N */. These silently fail on ??, ternaries, catch bodies, and short-circuit operators (&&, ||) — the directive is not applied but no error is reported, producing false coverage numbers. Flag as High severity. Fix: replace with /* v8 ignore start */ / /* v8 ignore stop */.

Check 5: Unpaired mock boundaries

For every unit test that mocks a system boundary, verify a corresponding test exists in the integration lane. Resolve the lane from .claude/tdd-guardian/config.json — its command tells you which paths or markers the integration lane actually runs, so check there rather than assuming a directory name.

Finding	Severity
Mocked boundary with no integration-lane counterpart	Medium
Mocked boundary and the repo has no integration lane at all	Medium — report once, against the config, not per test
Security property verified via mock args, no integration counterpart	High (also Check 3)

Report the missing lane against the config rather than repeating it per test. One configuration finding is actionable; forty duplicates are noise.

Check 6: Lane assignment

For each test under review, ask the lane-policy question: would this test still pass if the real collaborator were broken? If yes, it is in the wrong lane. Flag as Medium severity with the lane it belongs in.

Common cases: SQL correctness verified against a mocked driver, auth middleware verified against a stubbed guard, file permissions verified against a mocked fs.

Check 7: Under-specified units (specification strength)

Checks 1-6 all ask whether the test verifies the real thing. This one asks whether the claim is strong enough to be worth verifying.

For each changed unit, identify whether it has a law — a conserved quantity, a round-trip, an idempotent operation, an ordering, a monotonic relation, or a stated invariant. If it does and every test for it is S1/S2 (examples and boundaries only), flag it.

Finding	Severity
Unit has a law; no S4-S6 case covers it	Medium
Unit is on a criticalPaths entry with requireSpecLevel and does not meet it	High
Every test for a unit would still pass against a hard-coded return value	High
Matrix omits the question entirely (no law identified, no statement that none exists)	Low

The hard-coded-return check is the cheap version: if replacing the function body with return <the expected value> would keep every test green, the tests specify one example, not the behavior. Run that check on every changed unit before reaching for the law question.

Check 8: Change tax (the symmetric pathology)

Checks 1-6 push toward more verification. Unchecked, that produces a suite so coupled to structure that nobody refactors. These findings push back, and they are findings in the same sense as the others — see the change-tax table in policy-core.

Finding	Severity
A change with no behavior change edits existing assertions	Medium — the tests specify structure
An interface with exactly one production implementation and one test double	Medium — the seam exists only to be mocked
More distinct mocks in a test than the unit has collaborators	Medium
A test that must change when a private method is renamed	Medium

Read the diff for this one. Assertions added are healthy at any volume. Assertions modified while the described behavior is unchanged are the signal — that is the specification moving to fit the implementation, which is the same defect the red receipts catch, seen in the diff rather than in the receipt.

If .claude/tdd-guardian/receipts.json exists, read it: a receipt with verdict SEPARATION-BROKEN names the exact files, and its finding is High.

Output format for test quality findings

### Test Quality Findings

| # | Severity | File:Line | Finding | Fix |
|---|----------|-----------|---------|-----|
| 1 | High | docker/container.test.ts:52 | Wiring-only: security defaults verified via mock args, no behavioral assertion | Add integration test that inspects real container |
| 2 | Med | cli/lifecycle.test.ts:50 | Mock-was-called as sole verification for stop command | Assert formatted output or inspect container state |
| 3 | High | src/config.ts:42 | `/* v8 ignore next 3 */` on `??` expression — silently fails | Replace with `/* v8 ignore start */` / `/* v8 ignore stop */` |

Scope

Covers the final review rubric: finding order, the test-quality audit checks, the specification-strength and change-tax audits, the lane audit, and severity assignment.

Does NOT cover:

Question	Skill
What do assertion Levels 1-7 mean?	tdd-guardian:policy-core
What do specification levels S1-S6 mean?	tdd-guardian:policy-core
Which lane should a test live in?	tdd-guardian:lane-policy
How are coverage numbers computed?	tdd-guardian:coverage-gate
Which property library fits this language?	tdd-guardian:tooling-catalog