@su-record/vibe 2.9.17 → 2.9.19

package/skills/vibe-spec-review/SKILL.md

@@ -1,726 +1,726 @@
----
-name: vibe-spec-review
-tier: core
-description: "Review and enhance an existing SPEC with GPT/Gemini cross-validation. Runs 100-point quality gate (loop until perfect or stuck), Race Review with convergence-based termination (no round cap), optional Codex adversarial review, Review Debate Team, and final user checkpoint. Must use this skill after vibe-spec completes, or when the user says 'review spec', '스펙 리뷰'."
-triggers: ["spec review", "review spec", "SPEC 리뷰", "명세 리뷰", race review]
-priority: 80
-chain-next: []
----
-
-# vibe-spec-review — SPEC Quality Review
-
-Review and enhance SPEC with GPT/Gemini cross-validation.
-
-**Purpose:** Run this skill after `vibe-spec` to ensure accurate review execution. For large contexts, invoke in a new session.
-
----
-
-## Usage
-
-This skill is automatically called in Phase 4 of the `/vibe.spec` orchestrator. If direct invocation is needed:
-
-```
-Load skill `vibe-spec-review` with feature: "feature-name"
-```
-
-Or via natural language trigger: "스펙 리뷰", "review spec", "명세 리뷰".
-
-**Prerequisites:**
-- SPEC file exists: `.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md` (single) or `.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}/_index.md` (split)
-- Feature file exists: `.claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}.feature` (single) or `.claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}/_index.feature` (split)
-
----
-
-## Codex Plugin Integration
-
-> **Codex plugin detection**: Auto-detected at workflow start with the command below.
->
-> ```bash
-> CODEX_AVAILABLE=$(node "{{VIBE_PATH}}/hooks/scripts/codex-detect.js" 2>/dev/null || echo "unavailable")
-> ```
->
-> If `available`, `/codex:adversarial-review` is automatically invoked. If `unavailable`, falls back to the existing GPT+Gemini workflow.
-
----
-
-> **⏱️ Timer**: Call `getCurrentTime` tool at the START. Record the result as `{start_time}`.
-
-**`.last-feature` pointer update** (immediately after Timer):
-
-```
-Write ".claude/vibe/.last-feature" ← feature-name (one line)
-If the value is already the same, no-op.
-```
-
-## Workflow
-
-```
-/vibe.spec "feature" → SPEC created (Phase 3)
-        ↓
-Phase 4: vibe-spec-review skill (this) → Quality validation + GPT/Gemini review
-        ↓
-    /vibe.run "feature"
-```
-
-**For large contexts**: After `/new`, re-enter `/vibe.spec "feature"` → Smart Resume will start from Phase 4.
-
----
-
-## File Reading Policy (Mandatory)
-
-- **Delegate SPEC reading to sub-agents** — Do NOT read all SPEC/Feature files in main session
-- **Split structure (3+ phases)**: Use `Task(subagent_type="explorer-medium")` to read and summarize
-- **Single file structure**: Main session may Read directly (small enough)
-- **Never use Grep** for content analysis — Grep is for file location only
-- **Agent spawn rule**: Include "Read target files FULLY with Read tool" in agent prompts
-
-## Step 1: Load SPEC Files
-
-Detect SPEC structure (single file or split folder) and read files:
-
-**Single file structure:**
-```
-.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md
-.claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}.feature
-```
-
-**Split folder structure:**
-```
-.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}/_index.md      (+ phase files)
-.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}/phase-*.md     (phase-1-xxx.md, phase-2-xxx.md, ...)
-.claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}/_index.feature (+ phase files)
-.claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}/phase-*.feature
-```
-
-**Detection logic:**
-1. Check if `.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}/` directory exists → Split mode
-2. Otherwise check `.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md` → Single mode
-3. If neither exists → Error
-
-**Split mode file loading:**
-1. Read `_index.md` for master SPEC overview
-2. Glob `phase-*.md` files and read all phase SPECs
-3. Read corresponding `_index.feature` and `phase-*.feature` files
-
-**Output:**
-```
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-📋 SPEC REVIEW: {feature-name}
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-Loading files...
-  Mode: {single|split}
-  ✅ SPEC: .claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md (or _index.md + N phase files)
-  ✅ Feature: .claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}.feature (or _index.feature + N phase files)
-
-Extracted info:
-  - Feature: {feature description}
-  - Stack: {tech stack}
-  - Phases: {number of phases}
-  - Scenarios: {number of scenarios}
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-```
-
----
-
-## Step 2: Quality Validation (100-Point Gate)
-
-**🚨 MANDATORY: Score must reach 100 to proceed. Loop until perfect or stuck.**
-
-### 2.1 Quality Checklist
-
-| Category | Check Item | Weight |
-|----------|------------|--------|
-| **Completeness** | All user flows included in Task | 15% |
-| **Completeness** | All ACs converted to Feature scenarios | 10% |
-| **Completeness** | Error handling scenarios defined | 10% |
-| **Specificity** | All numbers specified (timeout, limits, etc.) | 15% |
-| **Specificity** | No ambiguous terms ("appropriate", "proper", etc.) | 10% |
-| **Testability** | Each AC is verifiable | 10% |
-| **Testability** | Feature scenarios have concrete Given/When/Then | 10% |
-| **Security** | Auth/permission requirements specified | 10% |
-| **Performance** | Response time/load requirements specified | 10% |
-
-### 2.2 Quality Gate Loop (No Round Cap)
-
-```python
-iteration = 0
-prev_score = -1
-
-while True:
-    iteration += 1
-    score = calculate_quality_score(spec, feature)
-
-    print(f"━━━ Quality Check [{iteration}] ━━━")
-    print(f"Score: {score}/100")
-
-    if score >= 100:
-        print("✅ Quality Gate PASSED (100/100)")
-        break
-
-    # Auto-fixer hit a wall → ask the user (prevents runaway AND respects 100 target)
-    if score == prev_score:
-        missing_items = identify_missing_items(spec)
-        print(f"⚠️ Auto-fixer limit reached: stuck at {score}/100")
-        print(f"Remaining items require human input:")
-        for item in missing_items:
-            print(f"  ❌ {item}")
-
-        if ultrawork_mode:
-            # ultrawork: no user intervention, record TODO and proceed
-            print("ℹ️ ultrawork mode — recording gaps to TODO and proceeding")
-            record_todo(missing_items)
-            break
-
-        # Interactive: ask the user to fill in or explicitly approve
-        user_input = ask_user(
-            "Please either:\n"
-            "  1. Provide values for the remaining items (I'll apply them)\n"
-            "  2. Type 'proceed' to accept current score and continue\n"
-            "  3. Type 'abort' to stop the workflow"
-        )
-
-        if user_input == "abort":
-            raise WorkflowAborted("User aborted at Quality Gate")
-        if user_input == "proceed":
-            record_todo(missing_items)
-            break
-        # otherwise: apply user-provided values → re-evaluate
-        apply_user_values(user_input)
-        continue
-
-    prev_score = score
-
-    # Auto-fix missing items
-    missing_items = identify_missing_items(spec)
-    for item in missing_items:
-        auto_fix(item)
-        update_spec()
-        update_feature()
-
-    print(f"✅ Applied {len(missing_items)} fixes - Re-evaluating...")
-```
-
-**Termination conditions:**
-- `score == 100` → pass (primary success)
-- `score == prev_score` (auto-fixer stuck) → **ask the user**:
-  - User provides values → re-evaluate (loop continues, may reach 100)
-  - User says "proceed" → record gaps as TODO and continue to Step 3
-  - User says "abort" → stop entire workflow
-  - `ultrawork` mode → skip prompt, auto-record TODO and continue
-- No iteration cap — the only way to exit without 100 is explicit user approval or ultrawork.
-
-**Output format:**
-```
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-📊 QUALITY GATE [1]
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-Score: 87/100 ⚠️ BELOW 100
-
-Missing items:
-  ❌ Error handling scenarios (10%)
-  ❌ Performance targets (5%)
-
-Auto-fixing...
-  ✅ Added network error handling scenario
-  ✅ Added response time targets (<500ms)
-
-Re-evaluating...
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-📊 QUALITY GATE [2]
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-Score: 96/100 ⚠️ BELOW 100
-
-Missing items:
-  ❌ Concurrent session policy (4%)
-
-Auto-fixing...
-  ✅ Added concurrent session policy
-
-Re-evaluating...
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-📊 QUALITY GATE [3]
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-Score: 100/100 ✅ PASSED
-
-✅ Quality Gate PASSED - proceeding to GPT/Gemini review
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-```
-
-**Stuck case (auto-fixer limit reached):**
-```
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-📊 QUALITY GATE [4]
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-Score: 87/100 ⚠️ STUCK (same as previous iteration)
-
-Auto-fixer hit a wall. These items need human input:
-  ❌ Business rule: monthly subscription renewal grace period (days?)
-  ❌ Target latency for search API (<?ms)
-  ❌ Data retention policy for audit logs (how many days?)
-
-How would you like to proceed?
-  1. Provide the values directly (e.g., "grace period 7 days, search 500ms, audit logs 90 days")
-     → Values will be applied and the score re-evaluated (100 may be reachable)
-  2. "proceed" — Accept the current score, record remaining items as TODO, then continue to Step 3
-  3. "abort" — Stop the workflow
-
-(In ultrawork mode, this prompt is skipped — TODO is auto-recorded and execution continues)
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-```
-
-### 2.3 Auto-Fix Rules
-
-| Missing Item | Auto-Fix Method |
-|--------------|-----------------|
-| Missing AC | Auto-generate AC based on Task |
-| Numbers not specified | Apply project defaults (timeout 30s, etc.) |
-| Missing error handling | Add common error scenarios |
-| Missing performance targets | Apply industry standard criteria |
-| Missing security | Add auth/data protection requirements |
-| Ambiguous terms | Replace with specific values |
-
----
-
-## Step 3: Race Review (GPT + Gemini Cross-Validation) - Convergence-Based (No Round Cap)
-
-**RULES FOR RACE REVIEW:**
-
-1. **YOU MUST** use the Bash tool to call `llm-orchestrate.js` directly
-2. **DO NOT** simulate or fake review results
-3. Run rounds sequentially (each round uses updated SPEC)
-4. **No hard round cap** — loop until P1=0 AND no new findings (convergence)
-
-> Race Mode reviews SPEC with GPT and Gemini in parallel, then cross-validates findings for higher confidence. The loop continues until quality converges naturally.
-
-### Termination Rules
-
-- **P1 = 0 AND no new findings this round** → converged, stop (primary success)
-- **Round 1 with P1 = 0 AND no P2/P3** → perfect on first try, stop (early success)
-- **Round N findings == Round N-1 findings** → **stuck**: LLMs keep flagging same issues that auto-applier can't resolve → **ask the user** (see 3.2.1)
-
-### Stuck Handling (3.2.1)
-
-When the same findings repeat across rounds, the auto-apply loop has hit a wall. This typically means:
-- The fix requires human judgment (architectural trade-off, domain rule, etc.)
-- The LLMs are producing a false positive that the auto-applier can't dismiss
-- The suggested fix conflicts with an existing constraint
-
-**Interactive mode** — prompt the user:
-
-```
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-⚠️ RACE REVIEW STUCK at Round {N}
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-Same findings repeated from Round {N-1}. Auto-applier cannot resolve:
-
-| # | Issue | Severity | GPT | Gemini | Reason it's stuck |
-|---|-------|----------|-----|--------|-------------------|
-| 1 | {issue title} | P1 | ✅ | ✅ | {e.g., "fix requires domain decision"} |
-| 2 | {issue title} | P2 | ✅ | ❌ | {e.g., "conflicts with existing constraint"} |
-
-How would you like to proceed?
-  1. Provide a resolution directly (e.g., "issue 1: retry 5 times, issue 2: ignore")
-     → Changes will be applied and the next round re-run
-  2. "proceed" — Record current issues as TODO and continue to Step 4
-  3. "abort" — Stop the workflow
-
-(In ultrawork mode, this prompt is skipped — TODO is auto-recorded and execution continues)
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-```
-
-**Pseudocode:**
-
-```python
-if current_findings == prev_findings:
-    if ultrawork_mode:
-        print("ℹ️ ultrawork mode — recording stuck issues to TODO and proceeding")
-        record_todo(current_findings)
-        break
-
-    user_input = ask_user(
-        "Race Review stuck. Please either:\n"
-        "  1. Provide resolution for the listed issues\n"
-        "  2. Type 'proceed' to record as TODO and continue to Step 4\n"
-        "  3. Type 'abort' to stop the workflow"
-    )
-
-    if user_input == "abort":
-        raise WorkflowAborted("User aborted at Race Review")
-    if user_input == "proceed":
-        record_todo(current_findings)
-        break
-    # otherwise: apply user-provided resolutions → next round
-    apply_user_resolutions(user_input)
-    continue  # re-run the round with updated SPEC
-```
-
-### Narrowing Scope (Noise Reduction)
-
-To prevent LLM cosmetic noise from causing infinite loops while still reaching 100% quality:
-
-| Round | Scope |
-|-------|-------|
-| 1 | Full scope (P1 + P2 + P3) |
-| 2 | P1 + P2 only |
-| 3+ | P1 only (until P1=0 or convergence) |
-
-### 3.1 Review Loop (No Round Cap)
-
-**Run GPT + Gemini in PARALLEL via Bash tool for each round. Stop when termination rules trigger.**
-
-**🚨 IMPORTANT: SPEC content is too large for CLI arguments. Use --input file method (no pipe needed).**
-
-**Procedure for each round:**
-
-**Step A: Save SPEC content + prompt as JSON to scratchpad temp file (using Write tool):**
-- Write JSON to `[SCRATCHPAD]/spec-review-input.json` with content:
-```json
-{"prompt": "Review this SPEC for completeness, specificity, testability, security, and performance. Round [N] (scope: [SCOPE]). Find issues and improvements. Return JSON: {issues: [{id, title, description, severity, suggestion}]}. SPEC content: [SPEC_CONTENT]"}
-```
-- Where `[SPEC_CONTENT]` is the full SPEC text (properly JSON-escaped inside the prompt string)
-- `[SCOPE]` is `P1+P2+P3` for round 1, `P1+P2` for round 2, `P1` for rounds 3+
-
-**Step B: Script path:**
-- `[LLM_SCRIPT]` = `{{VIBE_PATH}}/hooks/scripts/llm-orchestrate.js`
-
-**Step C: Run GPT + Gemini in PARALLEL (two separate Bash tool calls at once):**
-
-```bash
-# GPT review (Bash tool call 1)
-node "[LLM_SCRIPT]" gpt orchestrate-json --input "[SCRATCHPAD]/spec-review-input.json"
-```
-
-```bash
-# Gemini review (Bash tool call 2 - run in parallel with GPT)
-node "[LLM_SCRIPT]" gemini orchestrate-json --input "[SCRATCHPAD]/spec-review-input.json"
-```
-
-**🚨 MANDATORY: Replace `[SCRATCHPAD]` with the actual scratchpad directory path.**
-**🚨 Replace `[N]` with the current round number (1, 2, 3, ...).**
-**🚨 Replace `[LLM_SCRIPT]` with the resolved absolute path from Step B.**
-**🚨 Run GPT and Gemini calls in PARALLEL (two separate Bash tool calls at once).**
-
-- Round 1: Write SPEC → Run GPT + Gemini in parallel (full scope) → Cross-validate → Apply fixes → Update SPEC file
-- Round 2: Write updated SPEC → Run (P1+P2 scope) → Cross-validate → Apply fixes → Update SPEC file
-- Round 3+: Write updated SPEC → Run (P1-only scope) → Cross-validate → Apply fixes → Continue until P1=0 AND no new findings (or convergence detected)
-
-### 3.2 Cross-Validation Rules
-
-| Agreement | Priority | Action |
-|-----------|----------|--------|
-| Both models agree (100%) | P1 | Auto-apply immediately |
-| 1 model only (50%) | P2 | Auto-apply with note |
-
-**After each round:**
-
-1. Cross-validate findings (issues found by 2+ models → P1, single model → P2)
-2. Merge feedback with confidence scores
-3. Auto-apply P1/P2 improvements to SPEC and Feature files (use Edit tool)
-4. Continue to next round with updated SPEC content
-
-### 3.3 User Decision Checkpoint (After Convergence)
-
-**🚨 MANDATORY: Run user judgment checkpoint when the review loop reaches convergence**
-
-> Type 6 (Iterative-Reasoning) pattern: AI does not decide alone — judges together with the user
-
-```
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-🔍 USER CHECKPOINT: Review Results
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-Key changes found across {N} review rounds:
-
-| # | Change | Source | Confidence |
-|---|--------|--------|------------|
-| 1 | {change1} | GPT+Gemini | 100% |
-| 2 | {change2} | GPT only | 50% |
-| ... | ... | ... | ... |
-
-Questions:
-1. Are there any changes above you'd like to exclude?
-2. Are there any additional requirements that should be specified?
-3. Do you agree with the technical approach?
-
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-```
-
-**Checkpoint action rules:**
-
-| Situation | Action |
-|-----------|--------|
-| `ultrawork` mode | Skip checkpoint, auto-proceed |
-| Normal mode | Must wait for user response |
-| User requests changes | Apply changes, then re-run checkpoint |
-| User approves | Proceed to Step 4 |
-
-**Output format:**
-```
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-🏁 SPEC RACE REVIEW - Round 1 (scope: P1+P2+P3)
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-Model Results:
-| Model  | Issues | Duration |
-|--------|--------|----------|
-| GPT    | 2      | 1823ms   |
-| Gemini | 2      | 2156ms   |
-
-Cross-Validated Issues:
-| Issue                    | GPT | Gemini | Codex | Confidence |
-|--------------------------|-----|--------|-------|------------|
-| Missing retry logic      | ✅  | ✅     | ✅    | 100% → P1  |
-| Missing rate limiting    | ✅  | ✅     | ✅    | 100% → P1  |
-| Token refresh unclear    | ✅  | ❌     | ❌    | 50% → P2   |
-
-Auto-applying...
-  ✅ [P1] Added retry logic (3 attempts, exponential backoff)
-  ✅ [P1] Added rate limiting (100 req/min)
-  ✅ [P2] Added token refresh flow
-
-✅ Round 1 complete - 3 improvements (2 P1, 1 P2)
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-🏁 SPEC RACE REVIEW - Round 2 (scope: P1+P2)
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-Cross-Validated Issues:
-| Issue                       | GPT | Gemini | Codex | Confidence |
-|-----------------------------|-----|--------|-------|------------|
-| Concurrent session unclear  | ✅  | ❌     | ❌    | 50% → P2   |
-
-Auto-applying...
-  ✅ [P2] Added concurrent session policy
-
-✅ Round 2 complete - 1 improvement
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-🏁 SPEC RACE REVIEW - Round 3 (scope: P1)
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-Cross-Validated Issues: None
-
-✅ Converged: P1 = 0 AND no new findings
-✅ Consensus Rate: 100%
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-```
-
-> If new P1s appear at round 3, the loop continues to round 4, 5, ... until convergence.
-
-### Step 3.1: Codex Adversarial Review (When Codex Plugin Is Active)
-
-> **Activation condition**: Automatically runs when Codex plugin is installed. Skipped if not installed.
-> Runs **simultaneously** with GPT+Gemini Race Review for triple cross-validation.
-
-Codex adversarial review **challenges the design decisions** in the SPEC:
-- Validates whether an alternative architecture would be better
-- Checks for over-engineering or under-engineering
-- Identifies missing edge cases and non-functional requirements
-
-**Execution (parallel with GPT+Gemini Race):**
-
-```
-/codex:adversarial-review
-```
-
-**Result integration**: Add Codex column to the Race Review cross-validation table:
-
-```markdown
-| Issue | GPT | Gemini | Codex | Confidence |
-|-------|-----|--------|-------|------------|
-| {issue} | ✅/❌ | ✅/❌ | ✅/❌ | {%} |
-```
-
-- 2 or more of 3 models agree → **High Confidence**
-- Issue found only by Codex → **P2** (requires design perspective review)
-- All 3 models agree → **P1** (fix immediately)
-
----
-
-## Step 3.5: Review Debate Team (Agent Teams)
-
-> **Team definition**: See `agents/teams/review-debate-team.md` (SPEC Review context)
-> **Condition**: Agent Teams enabled + 2 or more P1/P2 issues found after review loop convergence
-
-**Activation conditions:**
-
-| Situation | Action |
-|-----------|--------|
-| 2 or more P1/P2 issues | Auto-activate |
-| 1 or fewer P1/P2 issues | Skip → proceed to Step 4 |
-| Agent Teams disabled | Skip → proceed to Step 4 |
-
-**Result integration:**
-- Apply team consensus results to SPEC (P1 applied immediately, P2 added as notes)
-- Team member shutdown_request → clean up with TeamDelete
-- Proceed to Step 4 (Final Summary)
-
----
-
-## Step 4: Final Summary
-
-```
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-✅ SPEC REVIEW COMPLETE: {feature-name}
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-Quality Score: 100/100 ✅
-Review Rounds: {N} (converged: P1=0, no new findings) ✅
-Total Improvements: {M}
-⏱️ Started: {start_time}
-⏱️ Completed: {getCurrentTime result}
-
-Updated files:
-  📋 .claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md (or split folder)
-  📋 .claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}.feature (or split folder)
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-```
-
----
-
-## Step 5: SPEC Summary for User Review
-
-**🚨 MANDATORY: Always output this summary before proceeding to `/vibe.run`.**
-
-After all review rounds, present the finalized SPEC to the user in a readable format:
-
-```
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-📋 SPEC SUMMARY: {feature-name}
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-## Feature Overview
-{1-2 line summary of feature purpose from SPEC's <role> and <context>}
-
-## Tech Stack
-{Tech stack list extracted from <context>}
-
-## Implementation Phases
-| Phase | Name | Key Tasks |
-|-------|------|-----------|
-| 1 | {phase name} | {1-line summary of core task} |
-| 2 | {phase name} | {1-line summary of core task} |
-| ... | ... | ... |
-
-## Key Scenarios ({N} total)
-{Scenario name list from Feature file}
-- Scenario: {name1}
-- Scenario: {name2}
-- ...
-
-## Key Constraints
-{3-5 key items from <constraints>}
-
-## Acceptance Criteria
-{Summary of key items from <acceptance>}
-
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-If anything above is incorrect, please request changes.
-If no issues, proceed with /vibe.run "{feature-name}".
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-```
-
-**Important:**
-
-- List ALL Phases, Scenarios, and Constraints from SPEC without omission
-- Keep it concise for quick user review
-- Wait for user confirmation after review (unless ultrawork mode)
-- In ultrawork mode: output summary then auto-proceed to `/vibe.run`
-
-### 5.1 Final User Checkpoint
-
-**🚨 MANDATORY: Final user confirmation before proceeding to `/vibe.run`**
-
-```
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-✅ SPEC Review Complete - Final Confirmation
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-
-Please answer the following questions:
-
-1. **Requirements accuracy**: Does the SPEC above accurately describe the originally intended feature?
-2. **Scope appropriateness**: Is the implementation scope neither too large nor too small?
-3. **Tech stack**: Do you agree with the chosen tech stack?
-4. **Priority**: Is the Phase order and priority correct?
-
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-💡 Type "ok" or "proceed" to approve / share any changes you'd like made
-━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
-```
-
-**Why This Checkpoint Matters:**
-
-> More AI doing more is not always better.
-> The best results come when the user thinks and judges together with AI.
-> This checkpoint induces the Type 6 (Iterative-Reasoning) pattern.
-
----
-
-## Next Step
-
-```
-/vibe.run "{feature-name}"
-```
-
----
-
-## Error Handling
-
-### SPEC Not Found
-```
-❌ ERROR: SPEC file not found
-
-Expected (single): .claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md
-Expected (split):  .claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}/_index.md
-
-Please run /vibe.spec "{feature-name}" first to create the SPEC.
-```
-
-### Feature Not Found
-```
-❌ ERROR: Feature file not found
-
-Expected (single): .claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}.feature
-Expected (split):  .claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}/_index.feature
-
-Please run /vibe.spec "{feature-name}" first to create the Feature file.
-```
-
-### GPT/Gemini Call Failed
-```
-⚠️ WARNING: {GPT|Gemini} call failed
-
-Error: {error message}
-
-Continuing with {other model} results only...
-```
-
----
-
-## Quick Mode
-
-For faster iteration (1 round only): pass `--quick` flag when invoking the skill (or via `/vibe.spec "feature-name" --quick` orchestrator).
-
----
-
-ARGUMENTS: $ARGUMENTS
-
-**File Detection (execute before Step 1):**
-
-```
-Feature name: $ARGUMENTS
-
-1. Check split folder: .claude/vibe/specs/$ARGUMENTS/_index.md
-   - If exists → Split mode (read all files in folder)
-2. Check single file: .claude/vibe/specs/$ARGUMENTS.md
-   - If exists → Single mode
-3. Neither exists → Show error with both expected paths
-```
+---
+name: vibe-spec-review
+tier: core
+description: "Review and enhance an existing SPEC with GPT/Gemini cross-validation. Runs 100-point quality gate (loop until perfect or stuck), Race Review with convergence-based termination (no round cap), optional Codex adversarial review, Review Debate Team, and final user checkpoint. Must use this skill after vibe-spec completes, or when the user says 'review spec', '스펙 리뷰'."
+triggers: ["spec review", "review spec", "SPEC 리뷰", "명세 리뷰", race review]
+priority: 80
+chain-next: []
+---
+
+# vibe-spec-review — SPEC Quality Review
+
+Review and enhance SPEC with GPT/Gemini cross-validation.
+
+**Purpose:** Run this skill after `vibe-spec` to ensure accurate review execution. For large contexts, invoke in a new session.
+
+---
+
+## Usage
+
+This skill is automatically called in Phase 4 of the `/vibe.spec` orchestrator. If direct invocation is needed:
+
+```
+Load skill `vibe-spec-review` with feature: "feature-name"
+```
+
+Or via natural language trigger: "스펙 리뷰", "review spec", "명세 리뷰".
+
+**Prerequisites:**
+- SPEC file exists: `.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md` (single) or `.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}/_index.md` (split)
+- Feature file exists: `.claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}.feature` (single) or `.claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}/_index.feature` (split)
+
+---
+
+## Codex Plugin Integration
+
+> **Codex plugin detection**: Auto-detected at workflow start with the command below.
+>
+> ```bash
+> CODEX_AVAILABLE=$(node "{{VIBE_PATH}}/hooks/scripts/codex-detect.js" 2>/dev/null || echo "unavailable")
+> ```
+>
+> If `available`, `/codex:adversarial-review` is automatically invoked. If `unavailable`, falls back to the existing GPT+Gemini workflow.
+
+---
+
+> **⏱️ Timer**: Call `getCurrentTime` tool at the START. Record the result as `{start_time}`.
+
+**`.last-feature` pointer update** (immediately after Timer):
+
+```
+Write ".claude/vibe/.last-feature" ← feature-name (one line)
+If the value is already the same, no-op.
+```
+
+## Workflow
+
+```
+/vibe.spec "feature" → SPEC created (Phase 3)
+        ↓
+Phase 4: vibe-spec-review skill (this) → Quality validation + GPT/Gemini review
+        ↓
+    /vibe.run "feature"
+```
+
+**For large contexts**: After `/new`, re-enter `/vibe.spec "feature"` → Smart Resume will start from Phase 4.
+
+---
+
+## File Reading Policy (Mandatory)
+
+- **Delegate SPEC reading to sub-agents** — Do NOT read all SPEC/Feature files in main session
+- **Split structure (3+ phases)**: Use `Task(subagent_type="explorer-medium")` to read and summarize
+- **Single file structure**: Main session may Read directly (small enough)
+- **Never use Grep** for content analysis — Grep is for file location only
+- **Agent spawn rule**: Include "Read target files FULLY with Read tool" in agent prompts
+
+## Step 1: Load SPEC Files
+
+Detect SPEC structure (single file or split folder) and read files:
+
+**Single file structure:**
+```
+.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md
+.claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}.feature
+```
+
+**Split folder structure:**
+```
+.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}/_index.md      (+ phase files)
+.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}/phase-*.md     (phase-1-xxx.md, phase-2-xxx.md, ...)
+.claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}/_index.feature (+ phase files)
+.claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}/phase-*.feature
+```
+
+**Detection logic:**
+1. Check if `.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}/` directory exists → Split mode
+2. Otherwise check `.claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md` → Single mode
+3. If neither exists → Error
+
+**Split mode file loading:**
+1. Read `_index.md` for master SPEC overview
+2. Glob `phase-*.md` files and read all phase SPECs
+3. Read corresponding `_index.feature` and `phase-*.feature` files
+
+**Output:**
+```
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+📋 SPEC REVIEW: {feature-name}
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+Loading files...
+  Mode: {single|split}
+  ✅ SPEC: .claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md (or _index.md + N phase files)
+  ✅ Feature: .claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}.feature (or _index.feature + N phase files)
+
+Extracted info:
+  - Feature: {feature description}
+  - Stack: {tech stack}
+  - Phases: {number of phases}
+  - Scenarios: {number of scenarios}
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+```
+
+---
+
+## Step 2: Quality Validation (100-Point Gate)
+
+**🚨 MANDATORY: Score must reach 100 to proceed. Loop until perfect or stuck.**
+
+### 2.1 Quality Checklist
+
+| Category | Check Item | Weight |
+|----------|------------|--------|
+| **Completeness** | All user flows included in Task | 15% |
+| **Completeness** | All ACs converted to Feature scenarios | 10% |
+| **Completeness** | Error handling scenarios defined | 10% |
+| **Specificity** | All numbers specified (timeout, limits, etc.) | 15% |
+| **Specificity** | No ambiguous terms ("appropriate", "proper", etc.) | 10% |
+| **Testability** | Each AC is verifiable | 10% |
+| **Testability** | Feature scenarios have concrete Given/When/Then | 10% |
+| **Security** | Auth/permission requirements specified | 10% |
+| **Performance** | Response time/load requirements specified | 10% |
+
+### 2.2 Quality Gate Loop (No Round Cap)
+
+```python
+iteration = 0
+prev_score = -1
+
+while True:
+    iteration += 1
+    score = calculate_quality_score(spec, feature)
+
+    print(f"━━━ Quality Check [{iteration}] ━━━")
+    print(f"Score: {score}/100")
+
+    if score >= 100:
+        print("✅ Quality Gate PASSED (100/100)")
+        break
+
+    # Auto-fixer hit a wall → ask the user (prevents runaway AND respects 100 target)
+    if score == prev_score:
+        missing_items = identify_missing_items(spec)
+        print(f"⚠️ Auto-fixer limit reached: stuck at {score}/100")
+        print(f"Remaining items require human input:")
+        for item in missing_items:
+            print(f"  ❌ {item}")
+
+        if ultrawork_mode:
+            # ultrawork: no user intervention, record TODO and proceed
+            print("ℹ️ ultrawork mode — recording gaps to TODO and proceeding")
+            record_todo(missing_items)
+            break
+
+        # Interactive: ask the user to fill in or explicitly approve
+        user_input = ask_user(
+            "Please either:\n"
+            "  1. Provide values for the remaining items (I'll apply them)\n"
+            "  2. Type 'proceed' to accept current score and continue\n"
+            "  3. Type 'abort' to stop the workflow"
+        )
+
+        if user_input == "abort":
+            raise WorkflowAborted("User aborted at Quality Gate")
+        if user_input == "proceed":
+            record_todo(missing_items)
+            break
+        # otherwise: apply user-provided values → re-evaluate
+        apply_user_values(user_input)
+        continue
+
+    prev_score = score
+
+    # Auto-fix missing items
+    missing_items = identify_missing_items(spec)
+    for item in missing_items:
+        auto_fix(item)
+        update_spec()
+        update_feature()
+
+    print(f"✅ Applied {len(missing_items)} fixes - Re-evaluating...")
+```
+
+**Termination conditions:**
+- `score == 100` → pass (primary success)
+- `score == prev_score` (auto-fixer stuck) → **ask the user**:
+  - User provides values → re-evaluate (loop continues, may reach 100)
+  - User says "proceed" → record gaps as TODO and continue to Step 3
+  - User says "abort" → stop entire workflow
+  - `ultrawork` mode → skip prompt, auto-record TODO and continue
+- No iteration cap — the only way to exit without 100 is explicit user approval or ultrawork.
+
+**Output format:**
+```
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+📊 QUALITY GATE [1]
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+Score: 87/100 ⚠️ BELOW 100
+
+Missing items:
+  ❌ Error handling scenarios (10%)
+  ❌ Performance targets (5%)
+
+Auto-fixing...
+  ✅ Added network error handling scenario
+  ✅ Added response time targets (<500ms)
+
+Re-evaluating...
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+📊 QUALITY GATE [2]
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+Score: 96/100 ⚠️ BELOW 100
+
+Missing items:
+  ❌ Concurrent session policy (4%)
+
+Auto-fixing...
+  ✅ Added concurrent session policy
+
+Re-evaluating...
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+📊 QUALITY GATE [3]
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+Score: 100/100 ✅ PASSED
+
+✅ Quality Gate PASSED - proceeding to GPT/Gemini review
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+```
+
+**Stuck case (auto-fixer limit reached):**
+```
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+📊 QUALITY GATE [4]
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+Score: 87/100 ⚠️ STUCK (same as previous iteration)
+
+Auto-fixer hit a wall. These items need human input:
+  ❌ Business rule: monthly subscription renewal grace period (days?)
+  ❌ Target latency for search API (<?ms)
+  ❌ Data retention policy for audit logs (how many days?)
+
+How would you like to proceed?
+  1. Provide the values directly (e.g., "grace period 7 days, search 500ms, audit logs 90 days")
+     → Values will be applied and the score re-evaluated (100 may be reachable)
+  2. "proceed" — Accept the current score, record remaining items as TODO, then continue to Step 3
+  3. "abort" — Stop the workflow
+
+(In ultrawork mode, this prompt is skipped — TODO is auto-recorded and execution continues)
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+```
+
+### 2.3 Auto-Fix Rules
+
+| Missing Item | Auto-Fix Method |
+|--------------|-----------------|
+| Missing AC | Auto-generate AC based on Task |
+| Numbers not specified | Apply project defaults (timeout 30s, etc.) |
+| Missing error handling | Add common error scenarios |
+| Missing performance targets | Apply industry standard criteria |
+| Missing security | Add auth/data protection requirements |
+| Ambiguous terms | Replace with specific values |
+
+---
+
+## Step 3: Race Review (GPT + Gemini Cross-Validation) - Convergence-Based (No Round Cap)
+
+**RULES FOR RACE REVIEW:**
+
+1. **YOU MUST** use the Bash tool to call `llm-orchestrate.js` directly
+2. **DO NOT** simulate or fake review results
+3. Run rounds sequentially (each round uses updated SPEC)
+4. **No hard round cap** — loop until P1=0 AND no new findings (convergence)
+
+> Race Mode reviews SPEC with GPT and Gemini in parallel, then cross-validates findings for higher confidence. The loop continues until quality converges naturally.
+
+### Termination Rules
+
+- **P1 = 0 AND no new findings this round** → converged, stop (primary success)
+- **Round 1 with P1 = 0 AND no P2/P3** → perfect on first try, stop (early success)
+- **Round N findings == Round N-1 findings** → **stuck**: LLMs keep flagging same issues that auto-applier can't resolve → **ask the user** (see 3.2.1)
+
+### Stuck Handling (3.2.1)
+
+When the same findings repeat across rounds, the auto-apply loop has hit a wall. This typically means:
+- The fix requires human judgment (architectural trade-off, domain rule, etc.)
+- The LLMs are producing a false positive that the auto-applier can't dismiss
+- The suggested fix conflicts with an existing constraint
+
+**Interactive mode** — prompt the user:
+
+```
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+⚠️ RACE REVIEW STUCK at Round {N}
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+Same findings repeated from Round {N-1}. Auto-applier cannot resolve:
+
+| # | Issue | Severity | GPT | Gemini | Reason it's stuck |
+|---|-------|----------|-----|--------|-------------------|
+| 1 | {issue title} | P1 | ✅ | ✅ | {e.g., "fix requires domain decision"} |
+| 2 | {issue title} | P2 | ✅ | ❌ | {e.g., "conflicts with existing constraint"} |
+
+How would you like to proceed?
+  1. Provide a resolution directly (e.g., "issue 1: retry 5 times, issue 2: ignore")
+     → Changes will be applied and the next round re-run
+  2. "proceed" — Record current issues as TODO and continue to Step 4
+  3. "abort" — Stop the workflow
+
+(In ultrawork mode, this prompt is skipped — TODO is auto-recorded and execution continues)
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+```
+
+**Pseudocode:**
+
+```python
+if current_findings == prev_findings:
+    if ultrawork_mode:
+        print("ℹ️ ultrawork mode — recording stuck issues to TODO and proceeding")
+        record_todo(current_findings)
+        break
+
+    user_input = ask_user(
+        "Race Review stuck. Please either:\n"
+        "  1. Provide resolution for the listed issues\n"
+        "  2. Type 'proceed' to record as TODO and continue to Step 4\n"
+        "  3. Type 'abort' to stop the workflow"
+    )
+
+    if user_input == "abort":
+        raise WorkflowAborted("User aborted at Race Review")
+    if user_input == "proceed":
+        record_todo(current_findings)
+        break
+    # otherwise: apply user-provided resolutions → next round
+    apply_user_resolutions(user_input)
+    continue  # re-run the round with updated SPEC
+```
+
+### Narrowing Scope (Noise Reduction)
+
+To prevent LLM cosmetic noise from causing infinite loops while still reaching 100% quality:
+
+| Round | Scope |
+|-------|-------|
+| 1 | Full scope (P1 + P2 + P3) |
+| 2 | P1 + P2 only |
+| 3+ | P1 only (until P1=0 or convergence) |
+
+### 3.1 Review Loop (No Round Cap)
+
+**Run GPT + Gemini in PARALLEL via Bash tool for each round. Stop when termination rules trigger.**
+
+**🚨 IMPORTANT: SPEC content is too large for CLI arguments. Use --input file method (no pipe needed).**
+
+**Procedure for each round:**
+
+**Step A: Save SPEC content + prompt as JSON to scratchpad temp file (using Write tool):**
+- Write JSON to `[SCRATCHPAD]/spec-review-input.json` with content:
+```json
+{"prompt": "Review this SPEC for completeness, specificity, testability, security, and performance. Round [N] (scope: [SCOPE]). Find issues and improvements. Return JSON: {issues: [{id, title, description, severity, suggestion}]}. SPEC content: [SPEC_CONTENT]"}
+```
+- Where `[SPEC_CONTENT]` is the full SPEC text (properly JSON-escaped inside the prompt string)
+- `[SCOPE]` is `P1+P2+P3` for round 1, `P1+P2` for round 2, `P1` for rounds 3+
+
+**Step B: Script path:**
+- `[LLM_SCRIPT]` = `{{VIBE_PATH}}/hooks/scripts/llm-orchestrate.js`
+
+**Step C: Run GPT + Gemini in PARALLEL (two separate Bash tool calls at once):**
+
+```bash
+# GPT review (Bash tool call 1)
+node "[LLM_SCRIPT]" gpt orchestrate-json --input "[SCRATCHPAD]/spec-review-input.json"
+```
+
+```bash
+# Gemini review (Bash tool call 2 - run in parallel with GPT)
+node "[LLM_SCRIPT]" gemini orchestrate-json --input "[SCRATCHPAD]/spec-review-input.json"
+```
+
+**🚨 MANDATORY: Replace `[SCRATCHPAD]` with the actual scratchpad directory path.**
+**🚨 Replace `[N]` with the current round number (1, 2, 3, ...).**
+**🚨 Replace `[LLM_SCRIPT]` with the resolved absolute path from Step B.**
+**🚨 Run GPT and Gemini calls in PARALLEL (two separate Bash tool calls at once).**
+
+- Round 1: Write SPEC → Run GPT + Gemini in parallel (full scope) → Cross-validate → Apply fixes → Update SPEC file
+- Round 2: Write updated SPEC → Run (P1+P2 scope) → Cross-validate → Apply fixes → Update SPEC file
+- Round 3+: Write updated SPEC → Run (P1-only scope) → Cross-validate → Apply fixes → Continue until P1=0 AND no new findings (or convergence detected)
+
+### 3.2 Cross-Validation Rules
+
+| Agreement | Priority | Action |
+|-----------|----------|--------|
+| Both models agree (100%) | P1 | Auto-apply immediately |
+| 1 model only (50%) | P2 | Auto-apply with note |
+
+**After each round:**
+
+1. Cross-validate findings (issues found by 2+ models → P1, single model → P2)
+2. Merge feedback with confidence scores
+3. Auto-apply P1/P2 improvements to SPEC and Feature files (use Edit tool)
+4. Continue to next round with updated SPEC content
+
+### 3.3 User Decision Checkpoint (After Convergence)
+
+**🚨 MANDATORY: Run user judgment checkpoint when the review loop reaches convergence**
+
+> Type 6 (Iterative-Reasoning) pattern: AI does not decide alone — judges together with the user
+
+```
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+🔍 USER CHECKPOINT: Review Results
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+Key changes found across {N} review rounds:
+
+| # | Change | Source | Confidence |
+|---|--------|--------|------------|
+| 1 | {change1} | GPT+Gemini | 100% |
+| 2 | {change2} | GPT only | 50% |
+| ... | ... | ... | ... |
+
+Questions:
+1. Are there any changes above you'd like to exclude?
+2. Are there any additional requirements that should be specified?
+3. Do you agree with the technical approach?
+
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+```
+
+**Checkpoint action rules:**
+
+| Situation | Action |
+|-----------|--------|
+| `ultrawork` mode | Skip checkpoint, auto-proceed |
+| Normal mode | Must wait for user response |
+| User requests changes | Apply changes, then re-run checkpoint |
+| User approves | Proceed to Step 4 |
+
+**Output format:**
+```
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+🏁 SPEC RACE REVIEW - Round 1 (scope: P1+P2+P3)
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+Model Results:
+| Model  | Issues | Duration |
+|--------|--------|----------|
+| GPT    | 2      | 1823ms   |
+| Gemini | 2      | 2156ms   |
+
+Cross-Validated Issues:
+| Issue                    | GPT | Gemini | Codex | Confidence |
+|--------------------------|-----|--------|-------|------------|
+| Missing retry logic      | ✅  | ✅     | ✅    | 100% → P1  |
+| Missing rate limiting    | ✅  | ✅     | ✅    | 100% → P1  |
+| Token refresh unclear    | ✅  | ❌     | ❌    | 50% → P2   |
+
+Auto-applying...
+  ✅ [P1] Added retry logic (3 attempts, exponential backoff)
+  ✅ [P1] Added rate limiting (100 req/min)
+  ✅ [P2] Added token refresh flow
+
+✅ Round 1 complete - 3 improvements (2 P1, 1 P2)
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+🏁 SPEC RACE REVIEW - Round 2 (scope: P1+P2)
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+Cross-Validated Issues:
+| Issue                       | GPT | Gemini | Codex | Confidence |
+|-----------------------------|-----|--------|-------|------------|
+| Concurrent session unclear  | ✅  | ❌     | ❌    | 50% → P2   |
+
+Auto-applying...
+  ✅ [P2] Added concurrent session policy
+
+✅ Round 2 complete - 1 improvement
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+🏁 SPEC RACE REVIEW - Round 3 (scope: P1)
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+Cross-Validated Issues: None
+
+✅ Converged: P1 = 0 AND no new findings
+✅ Consensus Rate: 100%
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+```
+
+> If new P1s appear at round 3, the loop continues to round 4, 5, ... until convergence.
+
+### Step 3.1: Codex Adversarial Review (When Codex Plugin Is Active)
+
+> **Activation condition**: Automatically runs when Codex plugin is installed. Skipped if not installed.
+> Runs **simultaneously** with GPT+Gemini Race Review for triple cross-validation.
+
+Codex adversarial review **challenges the design decisions** in the SPEC:
+- Validates whether an alternative architecture would be better
+- Checks for over-engineering or under-engineering
+- Identifies missing edge cases and non-functional requirements
+
+**Execution (parallel with GPT+Gemini Race):**
+
+```
+/codex:adversarial-review
+```
+
+**Result integration**: Add Codex column to the Race Review cross-validation table:
+
+```markdown
+| Issue | GPT | Gemini | Codex | Confidence |
+|-------|-----|--------|-------|------------|
+| {issue} | ✅/❌ | ✅/❌ | ✅/❌ | {%} |
+```
+
+- 2 or more of 3 models agree → **High Confidence**
+- Issue found only by Codex → **P2** (requires design perspective review)
+- All 3 models agree → **P1** (fix immediately)
+
+---
+
+## Step 3.5: Review Debate Team (Agent Teams)
+
+> **Team definition**: See `agents/teams/review-debate-team.md` (SPEC Review context)
+> **Condition**: Agent Teams enabled + 2 or more P1/P2 issues found after review loop convergence
+
+**Activation conditions:**
+
+| Situation | Action |
+|-----------|--------|
+| 2 or more P1/P2 issues | Auto-activate |
+| 1 or fewer P1/P2 issues | Skip → proceed to Step 4 |
+| Agent Teams disabled | Skip → proceed to Step 4 |
+
+**Result integration:**
+- Apply team consensus results to SPEC (P1 applied immediately, P2 added as notes)
+- Team member shutdown_request → clean up with TeamDelete
+- Proceed to Step 4 (Final Summary)
+
+---
+
+## Step 4: Final Summary
+
+```
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+✅ SPEC REVIEW COMPLETE: {feature-name}
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+Quality Score: 100/100 ✅
+Review Rounds: {N} (converged: P1=0, no new findings) ✅
+Total Improvements: {M}
+⏱️ Started: {start_time}
+⏱️ Completed: {getCurrentTime result}
+
+Updated files:
+  📋 .claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md (or split folder)
+  📋 .claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}.feature (or split folder)
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+```
+
+---
+
+## Step 5: SPEC Summary for User Review
+
+**🚨 MANDATORY: Always output this summary before proceeding to `/vibe.run`.**
+
+After all review rounds, present the finalized SPEC to the user in a readable format:
+
+```
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+📋 SPEC SUMMARY: {feature-name}
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+## Feature Overview
+{1-2 line summary of feature purpose from SPEC's <role> and <context>}
+
+## Tech Stack
+{Tech stack list extracted from <context>}
+
+## Implementation Phases
+| Phase | Name | Key Tasks |
+|-------|------|-----------|
+| 1 | {phase name} | {1-line summary of core task} |
+| 2 | {phase name} | {1-line summary of core task} |
+| ... | ... | ... |
+
+## Key Scenarios ({N} total)
+{Scenario name list from Feature file}
+- Scenario: {name1}
+- Scenario: {name2}
+- ...
+
+## Key Constraints
+{3-5 key items from <constraints>}
+
+## Acceptance Criteria
+{Summary of key items from <acceptance>}
+
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+If anything above is incorrect, please request changes.
+If no issues, proceed with /vibe.run "{feature-name}".
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+```
+
+**Important:**
+
+- List ALL Phases, Scenarios, and Constraints from SPEC without omission
+- Keep it concise for quick user review
+- Wait for user confirmation after review (unless ultrawork mode)
+- In ultrawork mode: output summary then auto-proceed to `/vibe.run`
+
+### 5.1 Final User Checkpoint
+
+**🚨 MANDATORY: Final user confirmation before proceeding to `/vibe.run`**
+
+```
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+✅ SPEC Review Complete - Final Confirmation
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+
+Please answer the following questions:
+
+1. **Requirements accuracy**: Does the SPEC above accurately describe the originally intended feature?
+2. **Scope appropriateness**: Is the implementation scope neither too large nor too small?
+3. **Tech stack**: Do you agree with the chosen tech stack?
+4. **Priority**: Is the Phase order and priority correct?
+
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+💡 Type "ok" or "proceed" to approve / share any changes you'd like made
+━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
+```
+
+**Why This Checkpoint Matters:**
+
+> More AI doing more is not always better.
+> The best results come when the user thinks and judges together with AI.
+> This checkpoint induces the Type 6 (Iterative-Reasoning) pattern.
+
+---
+
+## Next Step
+
+```
+/vibe.run "{feature-name}"
+```
+
+---
+
+## Error Handling
+
+### SPEC Not Found
+```
+❌ ERROR: SPEC file not found
+
+Expected (single): .claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}.md
+Expected (split):  .claude/vibe/specs/{feature-name}/_index.md
+
+Please run /vibe.spec "{feature-name}" first to create the SPEC.
+```
+
+### Feature Not Found
+```
+❌ ERROR: Feature file not found
+
+Expected (single): .claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}.feature
+Expected (split):  .claude/vibe/features/{feature-name}/_index.feature
+
+Please run /vibe.spec "{feature-name}" first to create the Feature file.
+```
+
+### GPT/Gemini Call Failed
+```
+⚠️ WARNING: {GPT|Gemini} call failed
+
+Error: {error message}
+
+Continuing with {other model} results only...
+```
+
+---
+
+## Quick Mode
+
+For faster iteration (1 round only): pass `--quick` flag when invoking the skill (or via `/vibe.spec "feature-name" --quick` orchestrator).
+
+---
+
+ARGUMENTS: $ARGUMENTS
+
+**File Detection (execute before Step 1):**
+
+```
+Feature name: $ARGUMENTS
+
+1. Check split folder: .claude/vibe/specs/$ARGUMENTS/_index.md
+   - If exists → Split mode (read all files in folder)
+2. Check single file: .claude/vibe/specs/$ARGUMENTS.md
+   - If exists → Single mode
+3. Neither exists → Show error with both expected paths
+```