llm-mock-server 1.0.6 → 1.0.7

package/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185401/prompts/batch-10.md

@@ -1,108 +0,0 @@
-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_185401/prompts/batch-2.md

@@ -1,89 +0,0 @@
-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_185401/prompts/batch-3.md

@@ -1,91 +0,0 @@
-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_185401/prompts/batch-4.md

@@ -1,77 +0,0 @@
-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_185401/prompts/batch-5.md

@@ -1,77 +0,0 @@
-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_185401/prompts/batch-6.md

@@ -1,78 +0,0 @@
-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"]
-  }
-}

package/.desloppify/subagents/runs/20260315_185401/prompts/batch-7.md

@@ -1,94 +0,0 @@
-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: 7
-Batch name: Package Organization
-Batch dimensions: package_organization, high_level_elegance
-Batch rationale: file placement, directory boundaries, architectural layering
-
-Files assigned:
-- vitest.config.ts
-- src/cli-validators.ts
-- src/cli.ts
-- src/history.ts
-- test/cli-validators.test.ts
-- test/history.test.ts
-- test/loader.test.ts
-- src/formats/anthropic/index.ts
-- src/formats/anthropic/parse.ts
-- src/formats/anthropic/schema.ts
-- src/formats/request-helpers.ts
-- src/formats/serialize-helpers.ts
-- src/formats/openai/index.ts
-- src/formats/openai/parse.ts
-- src/formats/responses/index.ts
-- src/formats/responses/parse.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.
-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": "Package Organization",
-  "batch_index": 7,
-  "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"]
-  }
-}