llm-mock-server 1.0.4 → 1.0.6

package/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185613/prompts/batch-1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+You are a focused subagent reviewer for a single holistic investigation batch.
+
+Repository root: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+Blind packet: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/review_packet_blind.json
+Batch index: 1
+Batch name: Architecture & Coupling
+Batch dimensions: cross_module_architecture, high_level_elegance
+Batch rationale: god modules, import-time side effects
+
+Files assigned:
+- src/types.ts
+- src/formats/types.ts
+- src/formats/request-helpers.ts
+- src/logger.ts
+- src/rule-engine.ts
+- src/history.ts
+- test/history.test.ts
+
+Task requirements:
+1. Read the blind packet and follow `system_prompt` constraints exactly.
+1a. If previously flagged issues are listed above, use them as context for your review.
+    Verify whether each still applies to the current code. Do not re-report fixed or
+    wontfix issues. Use them as starting points to look deeper — inspect adjacent code
+    and related modules for defects the prior review may have missed.
+1c. Think structurally: when you spot multiple individual issues that share a common
+    root cause (missing abstraction, duplicated pattern, inconsistent convention),
+    explain the deeper structural issue in the finding, not just the surface symptom.
+    If the pattern is significant enough, report the structural issue as its own finding
+    with appropriate fix_scope ('multi_file_refactor' or 'architectural_change') and
+    use `root_cause_cluster` to connect related symptom findings together.
+2. Evaluate ONLY listed files and ONLY listed dimensions for this batch.
+3. Return 0-10 high-quality findings for this batch (empty array allowed).
+3a. Do not suppress real defects to keep scores high; report every material issue you can support with evidence.
+3b. Do not default to 100. Reserve 100 for genuinely exemplary evidence in this batch.
+4. Score/finding consistency is required: broader or more severe findings MUST lower dimension scores.
+4a. Any dimension scored below 85.0 MUST include explicit feedback: add at least one finding with the same `dimension` and a non-empty actionable `suggestion`.
+5. Every finding must include `related_files` with at least 2 files when possible.
+6. Every finding must include `dimension`, `identifier`, `summary`, `evidence`, `suggestion`, and `confidence`.
+7. Every finding must include `impact_scope` and `fix_scope`.
+8. Every scored dimension MUST include dimension_notes with concrete evidence.
+9. If a dimension score is >85.0, include `issues_preventing_higher_score` in dimension_notes.
+10. Use exactly one decimal place for every assessment and abstraction sub-axis score.
+11. Ignore prior chat context and any target-threshold assumptions.
+12. Do not edit repository files.
+13. Return ONLY valid JSON, no markdown fences.
+
+Scope enums:
+- impact_scope: "local" | "module" | "subsystem" | "codebase"
+- fix_scope: "single_edit" | "multi_file_refactor" | "architectural_change"
+
+Output schema:
+{
+  "batch": "Architecture & Coupling",
+  "batch_index": 1,
+  "assessments": {"<dimension>": <0-100 with one decimal place>},
+  "dimension_notes": {
+    "<dimension>": {
+      "evidence": ["specific code observations"],
+      "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+      "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+      "issues_preventing_higher_score": "required when score >85.0",
+      "sub_axes": {"abstraction_leverage": 0-100 with one decimal place, "indirection_cost": 0-100 with one decimal place, "interface_honesty": 0-100 with one decimal place}  // required for abstraction_fitness when evidence supports it
+    }
+  },
+  "findings": [{
+    "dimension": "<dimension>",
+    "identifier": "short_id",
+    "summary": "one-line defect summary",
+    "related_files": ["relative/path.py"],
+    "evidence": ["specific code observation"],
+    "suggestion": "concrete fix recommendation",
+    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+    "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+    "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+    "root_cause_cluster": "optional_cluster_name_when_supported_by_history"
+  }],
+  "retrospective": {
+    "root_causes": ["optional: concise root-cause hypotheses"],
+    "likely_symptoms": ["optional: identifiers that look symptom-level"],
+    "possible_false_positives": ["optional: prior concept keys likely mis-scoped"]
+  }
+}

package/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185613/prompts/batch-10.md

@@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
+You are a focused subagent reviewer for a single holistic investigation batch.
+
+Repository root: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+Blind packet: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/review_packet_blind.json
+Batch index: 10
+Batch name: Full Codebase Sweep
+Batch dimensions: cross_module_architecture, convention_outlier, error_consistency, abstraction_fitness, api_surface_coherence, authorization_consistency, ai_generated_debt, incomplete_migration, package_organization, high_level_elegance, mid_level_elegance, low_level_elegance, design_coherence
+Batch rationale: thorough default: evaluate cross-cutting quality across all production files
+
+Files assigned:
+- src/cli-validators.ts
+- src/cli.ts
+- src/formats/anthropic/index.ts
+- src/formats/anthropic/parse.ts
+- src/formats/anthropic/schema.ts
+- src/formats/anthropic/serialize.ts
+- src/formats/openai/index.ts
+- src/formats/openai/parse.ts
+- src/formats/openai/schema.ts
+- src/formats/openai/serialize.ts
+- src/formats/request-helpers.ts
+- src/formats/responses/index.ts
+- src/formats/responses/parse.ts
+- src/formats/responses/schema.ts
+- src/formats/responses/serialize.ts
+- src/formats/serialize-helpers.ts
+- src/formats/types.ts
+- src/history.ts
+- src/index.ts
+- src/loader.ts
+- src/logger.ts
+- src/mock-server.ts
+- src/route-handler.ts
+- src/rule-engine.ts
+- src/sse-writer.ts
+- src/types.ts
+- src/types/reply.ts
+- src/types/request.ts
+- src/types/rule.ts
+- vitest.config.ts
+
+Task requirements:
+1. Read the blind packet and follow `system_prompt` constraints exactly.
+1a. If previously flagged issues are listed above, use them as context for your review.
+    Verify whether each still applies to the current code. Do not re-report fixed or
+    wontfix issues. Use them as starting points to look deeper — inspect adjacent code
+    and related modules for defects the prior review may have missed.
+1c. Think structurally: when you spot multiple individual issues that share a common
+    root cause (missing abstraction, duplicated pattern, inconsistent convention),
+    explain the deeper structural issue in the finding, not just the surface symptom.
+    If the pattern is significant enough, report the structural issue as its own finding
+    with appropriate fix_scope ('multi_file_refactor' or 'architectural_change') and
+    use `root_cause_cluster` to connect related symptom findings together.
+2. Evaluate ONLY listed files and ONLY listed dimensions for this batch.
+3. Return 0-13 high-quality findings for this batch (empty array allowed).
+3a. Do not suppress real defects to keep scores high; report every material issue you can support with evidence.
+3b. Do not default to 100. Reserve 100 for genuinely exemplary evidence in this batch.
+4. Score/finding consistency is required: broader or more severe findings MUST lower dimension scores.
+4a. Any dimension scored below 85.0 MUST include explicit feedback: add at least one finding with the same `dimension` and a non-empty actionable `suggestion`.
+5. Every finding must include `related_files` with at least 2 files when possible.
+6. Every finding must include `dimension`, `identifier`, `summary`, `evidence`, `suggestion`, and `confidence`.
+7. Every finding must include `impact_scope` and `fix_scope`.
+8. Every scored dimension MUST include dimension_notes with concrete evidence.
+9. If a dimension score is >85.0, include `issues_preventing_higher_score` in dimension_notes.
+10. Use exactly one decimal place for every assessment and abstraction sub-axis score.
+9a. For package_organization, ground scoring in objective structure signals from `holistic_context.structure` (root_files fan_in/fan_out roles, directory_profiles, coupling_matrix). Prefer thresholded evidence (for example: fan_in < 5 for root stragglers, import-affinity > 60%, directories > 10 files with mixed concerns).
+9b. Suggestions must include a staged reorg plan (target folders, move order, and import-update/validation commands).
+11. Ignore prior chat context and any target-threshold assumptions.
+12. Do not edit repository files.
+13. Return ONLY valid JSON, no markdown fences.
+
+Scope enums:
+- impact_scope: "local" | "module" | "subsystem" | "codebase"
+- fix_scope: "single_edit" | "multi_file_refactor" | "architectural_change"
+
+Output schema:
+{
+  "batch": "Full Codebase Sweep",
+  "batch_index": 10,
+  "assessments": {"<dimension>": <0-100 with one decimal place>},
+  "dimension_notes": {
+    "<dimension>": {
+      "evidence": ["specific code observations"],
+      "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+      "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+      "issues_preventing_higher_score": "required when score >85.0",
+      "sub_axes": {"abstraction_leverage": 0-100 with one decimal place, "indirection_cost": 0-100 with one decimal place, "interface_honesty": 0-100 with one decimal place}  // required for abstraction_fitness when evidence supports it
+    }
+  },
+  "findings": [{
+    "dimension": "<dimension>",
+    "identifier": "short_id",
+    "summary": "one-line defect summary",
+    "related_files": ["relative/path.py"],
+    "evidence": ["specific code observation"],
+    "suggestion": "concrete fix recommendation",
+    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+    "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+    "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+    "root_cause_cluster": "optional_cluster_name_when_supported_by_history"
+  }],
+  "retrospective": {
+    "root_causes": ["optional: concise root-cause hypotheses"],
+    "likely_symptoms": ["optional: identifiers that look symptom-level"],
+    "possible_false_positives": ["optional: prior concept keys likely mis-scoped"]
+  }
+}

package/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185613/prompts/batch-2.md

@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
+You are a focused subagent reviewer for a single holistic investigation batch.
+
+Repository root: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+Blind packet: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/review_packet_blind.json
+Batch index: 2
+Batch name: Conventions & Errors
+Batch dimensions: convention_outlier, error_consistency, mid_level_elegance
+Batch rationale: naming drift, behavioral outliers, mixed error strategies
+
+Files assigned:
+- src/cli.ts
+- src/formats/anthropic/schema.ts
+- src/formats/openai/schema.ts
+- src/formats/responses/schema.ts
+- src/logger.ts
+- src/types.ts
+- src/types/request.ts
+- test/helpers/make-req.ts
+- test/cli-validators.test.ts
+- test/mock-server.test.ts
+- test/rule-engine.test.ts
+- src/cli-validators.ts
+- src/history.ts
+
+Task requirements:
+1. Read the blind packet and follow `system_prompt` constraints exactly.
+1a. If previously flagged issues are listed above, use them as context for your review.
+    Verify whether each still applies to the current code. Do not re-report fixed or
+    wontfix issues. Use them as starting points to look deeper — inspect adjacent code
+    and related modules for defects the prior review may have missed.
+1c. Think structurally: when you spot multiple individual issues that share a common
+    root cause (missing abstraction, duplicated pattern, inconsistent convention),
+    explain the deeper structural issue in the finding, not just the surface symptom.
+    If the pattern is significant enough, report the structural issue as its own finding
+    with appropriate fix_scope ('multi_file_refactor' or 'architectural_change') and
+    use `root_cause_cluster` to connect related symptom findings together.
+2. Evaluate ONLY listed files and ONLY listed dimensions for this batch.
+3. Return 0-10 high-quality findings for this batch (empty array allowed).
+3a. Do not suppress real defects to keep scores high; report every material issue you can support with evidence.
+3b. Do not default to 100. Reserve 100 for genuinely exemplary evidence in this batch.
+4. Score/finding consistency is required: broader or more severe findings MUST lower dimension scores.
+4a. Any dimension scored below 85.0 MUST include explicit feedback: add at least one finding with the same `dimension` and a non-empty actionable `suggestion`.
+5. Every finding must include `related_files` with at least 2 files when possible.
+6. Every finding must include `dimension`, `identifier`, `summary`, `evidence`, `suggestion`, and `confidence`.
+7. Every finding must include `impact_scope` and `fix_scope`.
+8. Every scored dimension MUST include dimension_notes with concrete evidence.
+9. If a dimension score is >85.0, include `issues_preventing_higher_score` in dimension_notes.
+10. Use exactly one decimal place for every assessment and abstraction sub-axis score.
+11. Ignore prior chat context and any target-threshold assumptions.
+12. Do not edit repository files.
+13. Return ONLY valid JSON, no markdown fences.
+
+Scope enums:
+- impact_scope: "local" | "module" | "subsystem" | "codebase"
+- fix_scope: "single_edit" | "multi_file_refactor" | "architectural_change"
+
+Output schema:
+{
+  "batch": "Conventions & Errors",
+  "batch_index": 2,
+  "assessments": {"<dimension>": <0-100 with one decimal place>},
+  "dimension_notes": {
+    "<dimension>": {
+      "evidence": ["specific code observations"],
+      "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+      "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+      "issues_preventing_higher_score": "required when score >85.0",
+      "sub_axes": {"abstraction_leverage": 0-100 with one decimal place, "indirection_cost": 0-100 with one decimal place, "interface_honesty": 0-100 with one decimal place}  // required for abstraction_fitness when evidence supports it
+    }
+  },
+  "findings": [{
+    "dimension": "<dimension>",
+    "identifier": "short_id",
+    "summary": "one-line defect summary",
+    "related_files": ["relative/path.py"],
+    "evidence": ["specific code observation"],
+    "suggestion": "concrete fix recommendation",
+    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+    "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+    "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+    "root_cause_cluster": "optional_cluster_name_when_supported_by_history"
+  }],
+  "retrospective": {
+    "root_causes": ["optional: concise root-cause hypotheses"],
+    "likely_symptoms": ["optional: identifiers that look symptom-level"],
+    "possible_false_positives": ["optional: prior concept keys likely mis-scoped"]
+  }
+}

package/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185613/prompts/batch-3.md

@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+You are a focused subagent reviewer for a single holistic investigation batch.
+
+Repository root: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+Blind packet: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/review_packet_blind.json
+Batch index: 3
+Batch name: Abstractions & Dependencies
+Batch dimensions: abstraction_fitness, mid_level_elegance, low_level_elegance
+Batch rationale: abstraction hotspots (wrappers/interfaces/param bags), dep cycles
+
+Files assigned:
+- test/cli-validators.test.ts
+- src/mock-server.ts
+- test/formats/anthropic.test.ts
+- src/cli.ts
+- test/mock-server.test.ts
+- src/formats/responses/serialize.ts
+- test/formats/responses.test.ts
+- test/history.test.ts
+- src/rule-engine.ts
+- src/history.ts
+- src/loader.ts
+- test/formats/openai.test.ts
+- test/loader.test.ts
+- test/logger.test.ts
+- src/formats/openai/serialize.ts
+
+Task requirements:
+1. Read the blind packet and follow `system_prompt` constraints exactly.
+1a. If previously flagged issues are listed above, use them as context for your review.
+    Verify whether each still applies to the current code. Do not re-report fixed or
+    wontfix issues. Use them as starting points to look deeper — inspect adjacent code
+    and related modules for defects the prior review may have missed.
+1c. Think structurally: when you spot multiple individual issues that share a common
+    root cause (missing abstraction, duplicated pattern, inconsistent convention),
+    explain the deeper structural issue in the finding, not just the surface symptom.
+    If the pattern is significant enough, report the structural issue as its own finding
+    with appropriate fix_scope ('multi_file_refactor' or 'architectural_change') and
+    use `root_cause_cluster` to connect related symptom findings together.
+2. Evaluate ONLY listed files and ONLY listed dimensions for this batch.
+3. Return 0-10 high-quality findings for this batch (empty array allowed).
+3a. Do not suppress real defects to keep scores high; report every material issue you can support with evidence.
+3b. Do not default to 100. Reserve 100 for genuinely exemplary evidence in this batch.
+4. Score/finding consistency is required: broader or more severe findings MUST lower dimension scores.
+4a. Any dimension scored below 85.0 MUST include explicit feedback: add at least one finding with the same `dimension` and a non-empty actionable `suggestion`.
+5. Every finding must include `related_files` with at least 2 files when possible.
+6. Every finding must include `dimension`, `identifier`, `summary`, `evidence`, `suggestion`, and `confidence`.
+7. Every finding must include `impact_scope` and `fix_scope`.
+8. Every scored dimension MUST include dimension_notes with concrete evidence.
+9. If a dimension score is >85.0, include `issues_preventing_higher_score` in dimension_notes.
+10. Use exactly one decimal place for every assessment and abstraction sub-axis score.
+11. Ignore prior chat context and any target-threshold assumptions.
+12. Do not edit repository files.
+13. Return ONLY valid JSON, no markdown fences.
+
+Scope enums:
+- impact_scope: "local" | "module" | "subsystem" | "codebase"
+- fix_scope: "single_edit" | "multi_file_refactor" | "architectural_change"
+
+Output schema:
+{
+  "batch": "Abstractions & Dependencies",
+  "batch_index": 3,
+  "assessments": {"<dimension>": <0-100 with one decimal place>},
+  "dimension_notes": {
+    "<dimension>": {
+      "evidence": ["specific code observations"],
+      "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+      "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+      "issues_preventing_higher_score": "required when score >85.0",
+      "sub_axes": {"abstraction_leverage": 0-100 with one decimal place, "indirection_cost": 0-100 with one decimal place, "interface_honesty": 0-100 with one decimal place}  // required for abstraction_fitness when evidence supports it
+    }
+  },
+  "findings": [{
+    "dimension": "<dimension>",
+    "identifier": "short_id",
+    "summary": "one-line defect summary",
+    "related_files": ["relative/path.py"],
+    "evidence": ["specific code observation"],
+    "suggestion": "concrete fix recommendation",
+    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+    "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+    "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+    "root_cause_cluster": "optional_cluster_name_when_supported_by_history"
+  }],
+  "retrospective": {
+    "root_causes": ["optional: concise root-cause hypotheses"],
+    "likely_symptoms": ["optional: identifiers that look symptom-level"],
+    "possible_false_positives": ["optional: prior concept keys likely mis-scoped"]
+  }
+}

package/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185613/prompts/batch-4.md

@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
+You are a focused subagent reviewer for a single holistic investigation batch.
+
+Repository root: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+Blind packet: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/review_packet_blind.json
+Batch index: 4
+Batch name: Testing & API
+Batch dimensions: api_surface_coherence, mid_level_elegance
+Batch rationale: critical untested paths, API inconsistency
+
+Files assigned:
+- src/cli-validators.ts
+
+Task requirements:
+1. Read the blind packet and follow `system_prompt` constraints exactly.
+1a. If previously flagged issues are listed above, use them as context for your review.
+    Verify whether each still applies to the current code. Do not re-report fixed or
+    wontfix issues. Use them as starting points to look deeper — inspect adjacent code
+    and related modules for defects the prior review may have missed.
+1c. Think structurally: when you spot multiple individual issues that share a common
+    root cause (missing abstraction, duplicated pattern, inconsistent convention),
+    explain the deeper structural issue in the finding, not just the surface symptom.
+    If the pattern is significant enough, report the structural issue as its own finding
+    with appropriate fix_scope ('multi_file_refactor' or 'architectural_change') and
+    use `root_cause_cluster` to connect related symptom findings together.
+2. Evaluate ONLY listed files and ONLY listed dimensions for this batch.
+3. Return 0-10 high-quality findings for this batch (empty array allowed).
+3a. Do not suppress real defects to keep scores high; report every material issue you can support with evidence.
+3b. Do not default to 100. Reserve 100 for genuinely exemplary evidence in this batch.
+4. Score/finding consistency is required: broader or more severe findings MUST lower dimension scores.
+4a. Any dimension scored below 85.0 MUST include explicit feedback: add at least one finding with the same `dimension` and a non-empty actionable `suggestion`.
+5. Every finding must include `related_files` with at least 2 files when possible.
+6. Every finding must include `dimension`, `identifier`, `summary`, `evidence`, `suggestion`, and `confidence`.
+7. Every finding must include `impact_scope` and `fix_scope`.
+8. Every scored dimension MUST include dimension_notes with concrete evidence.
+9. If a dimension score is >85.0, include `issues_preventing_higher_score` in dimension_notes.
+10. Use exactly one decimal place for every assessment and abstraction sub-axis score.
+11. Ignore prior chat context and any target-threshold assumptions.
+12. Do not edit repository files.
+13. Return ONLY valid JSON, no markdown fences.
+
+Scope enums:
+- impact_scope: "local" | "module" | "subsystem" | "codebase"
+- fix_scope: "single_edit" | "multi_file_refactor" | "architectural_change"
+
+Output schema:
+{
+  "batch": "Testing & API",
+  "batch_index": 4,
+  "assessments": {"<dimension>": <0-100 with one decimal place>},
+  "dimension_notes": {
+    "<dimension>": {
+      "evidence": ["specific code observations"],
+      "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+      "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+      "issues_preventing_higher_score": "required when score >85.0",
+      "sub_axes": {"abstraction_leverage": 0-100 with one decimal place, "indirection_cost": 0-100 with one decimal place, "interface_honesty": 0-100 with one decimal place}  // required for abstraction_fitness when evidence supports it
+    }
+  },
+  "findings": [{
+    "dimension": "<dimension>",
+    "identifier": "short_id",
+    "summary": "one-line defect summary",
+    "related_files": ["relative/path.py"],
+    "evidence": ["specific code observation"],
+    "suggestion": "concrete fix recommendation",
+    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+    "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+    "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+    "root_cause_cluster": "optional_cluster_name_when_supported_by_history"
+  }],
+  "retrospective": {
+    "root_causes": ["optional: concise root-cause hypotheses"],
+    "likely_symptoms": ["optional: identifiers that look symptom-level"],
+    "possible_false_positives": ["optional: prior concept keys likely mis-scoped"]
+  }
+}

package/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185613/prompts/batch-5.md

@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
+You are a focused subagent reviewer for a single holistic investigation batch.
+
+Repository root: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+Blind packet: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/review_packet_blind.json
+Batch index: 5
+Batch name: Authorization
+Batch dimensions: authorization_consistency, mid_level_elegance
+Batch rationale: auth gaps, service role usage, RLS coverage
+
+Files assigned:
+- src/mock-server.ts
+
+Task requirements:
+1. Read the blind packet and follow `system_prompt` constraints exactly.
+1a. If previously flagged issues are listed above, use them as context for your review.
+    Verify whether each still applies to the current code. Do not re-report fixed or
+    wontfix issues. Use them as starting points to look deeper — inspect adjacent code
+    and related modules for defects the prior review may have missed.
+1c. Think structurally: when you spot multiple individual issues that share a common
+    root cause (missing abstraction, duplicated pattern, inconsistent convention),
+    explain the deeper structural issue in the finding, not just the surface symptom.
+    If the pattern is significant enough, report the structural issue as its own finding
+    with appropriate fix_scope ('multi_file_refactor' or 'architectural_change') and
+    use `root_cause_cluster` to connect related symptom findings together.
+2. Evaluate ONLY listed files and ONLY listed dimensions for this batch.
+3. Return 0-10 high-quality findings for this batch (empty array allowed).
+3a. Do not suppress real defects to keep scores high; report every material issue you can support with evidence.
+3b. Do not default to 100. Reserve 100 for genuinely exemplary evidence in this batch.
+4. Score/finding consistency is required: broader or more severe findings MUST lower dimension scores.
+4a. Any dimension scored below 85.0 MUST include explicit feedback: add at least one finding with the same `dimension` and a non-empty actionable `suggestion`.
+5. Every finding must include `related_files` with at least 2 files when possible.
+6. Every finding must include `dimension`, `identifier`, `summary`, `evidence`, `suggestion`, and `confidence`.
+7. Every finding must include `impact_scope` and `fix_scope`.
+8. Every scored dimension MUST include dimension_notes with concrete evidence.
+9. If a dimension score is >85.0, include `issues_preventing_higher_score` in dimension_notes.
+10. Use exactly one decimal place for every assessment and abstraction sub-axis score.
+11. Ignore prior chat context and any target-threshold assumptions.
+12. Do not edit repository files.
+13. Return ONLY valid JSON, no markdown fences.
+
+Scope enums:
+- impact_scope: "local" | "module" | "subsystem" | "codebase"
+- fix_scope: "single_edit" | "multi_file_refactor" | "architectural_change"
+
+Output schema:
+{
+  "batch": "Authorization",
+  "batch_index": 5,
+  "assessments": {"<dimension>": <0-100 with one decimal place>},
+  "dimension_notes": {
+    "<dimension>": {
+      "evidence": ["specific code observations"],
+      "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+      "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+      "issues_preventing_higher_score": "required when score >85.0",
+      "sub_axes": {"abstraction_leverage": 0-100 with one decimal place, "indirection_cost": 0-100 with one decimal place, "interface_honesty": 0-100 with one decimal place}  // required for abstraction_fitness when evidence supports it
+    }
+  },
+  "findings": [{
+    "dimension": "<dimension>",
+    "identifier": "short_id",
+    "summary": "one-line defect summary",
+    "related_files": ["relative/path.py"],
+    "evidence": ["specific code observation"],
+    "suggestion": "concrete fix recommendation",
+    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+    "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+    "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+    "root_cause_cluster": "optional_cluster_name_when_supported_by_history"
+  }],
+  "retrospective": {
+    "root_causes": ["optional: concise root-cause hypotheses"],
+    "likely_symptoms": ["optional: identifiers that look symptom-level"],
+    "possible_false_positives": ["optional: prior concept keys likely mis-scoped"]
+  }
+}

package/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185613/prompts/batch-6.md

@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
+You are a focused subagent reviewer for a single holistic investigation batch.
+
+Repository root: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server
+Blind packet: /Users/suyash.x.srijan/Documents/Personal_Projects/llm-mock-server/.desloppify/review_packet_blind.json
+Batch index: 6
+Batch name: AI Debt & Migrations
+Batch dimensions: ai_generated_debt, incomplete_migration, low_level_elegance
+Batch rationale: AI-generated patterns, deprecated markers, migration TODOs
+
+Files assigned:
+- src/types/request.ts
+- src/types/rule.ts
+
+Task requirements:
+1. Read the blind packet and follow `system_prompt` constraints exactly.
+1a. If previously flagged issues are listed above, use them as context for your review.
+    Verify whether each still applies to the current code. Do not re-report fixed or
+    wontfix issues. Use them as starting points to look deeper — inspect adjacent code
+    and related modules for defects the prior review may have missed.
+1c. Think structurally: when you spot multiple individual issues that share a common
+    root cause (missing abstraction, duplicated pattern, inconsistent convention),
+    explain the deeper structural issue in the finding, not just the surface symptom.
+    If the pattern is significant enough, report the structural issue as its own finding
+    with appropriate fix_scope ('multi_file_refactor' or 'architectural_change') and
+    use `root_cause_cluster` to connect related symptom findings together.
+2. Evaluate ONLY listed files and ONLY listed dimensions for this batch.
+3. Return 0-10 high-quality findings for this batch (empty array allowed).
+3a. Do not suppress real defects to keep scores high; report every material issue you can support with evidence.
+3b. Do not default to 100. Reserve 100 for genuinely exemplary evidence in this batch.
+4. Score/finding consistency is required: broader or more severe findings MUST lower dimension scores.
+4a. Any dimension scored below 85.0 MUST include explicit feedback: add at least one finding with the same `dimension` and a non-empty actionable `suggestion`.
+5. Every finding must include `related_files` with at least 2 files when possible.
+6. Every finding must include `dimension`, `identifier`, `summary`, `evidence`, `suggestion`, and `confidence`.
+7. Every finding must include `impact_scope` and `fix_scope`.
+8. Every scored dimension MUST include dimension_notes with concrete evidence.
+9. If a dimension score is >85.0, include `issues_preventing_higher_score` in dimension_notes.
+10. Use exactly one decimal place for every assessment and abstraction sub-axis score.
+11. Ignore prior chat context and any target-threshold assumptions.
+12. Do not edit repository files.
+13. Return ONLY valid JSON, no markdown fences.
+
+Scope enums:
+- impact_scope: "local" | "module" | "subsystem" | "codebase"
+- fix_scope: "single_edit" | "multi_file_refactor" | "architectural_change"
+
+Output schema:
+{
+  "batch": "AI Debt & Migrations",
+  "batch_index": 6,
+  "assessments": {"<dimension>": <0-100 with one decimal place>},
+  "dimension_notes": {
+    "<dimension>": {
+      "evidence": ["specific code observations"],
+      "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+      "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+      "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+      "issues_preventing_higher_score": "required when score >85.0",
+      "sub_axes": {"abstraction_leverage": 0-100 with one decimal place, "indirection_cost": 0-100 with one decimal place, "interface_honesty": 0-100 with one decimal place}  // required for abstraction_fitness when evidence supports it
+    }
+  },
+  "findings": [{
+    "dimension": "<dimension>",
+    "identifier": "short_id",
+    "summary": "one-line defect summary",
+    "related_files": ["relative/path.py"],
+    "evidence": ["specific code observation"],
+    "suggestion": "concrete fix recommendation",
+    "confidence": "high|medium|low",
+    "impact_scope": "local|module|subsystem|codebase",
+    "fix_scope": "single_edit|multi_file_refactor|architectural_change",
+    "root_cause_cluster": "optional_cluster_name_when_supported_by_history"
+  }],
+  "retrospective": {
+    "root_causes": ["optional: concise root-cause hypotheses"],
+    "likely_symptoms": ["optional: identifiers that look symptom-level"],
+    "possible_false_positives": ["optional: prior concept keys likely mis-scoped"]
+  }
+}