vibe-coding-master 0.4.18 → 0.4.19

This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
@@ -10,11 +10,49 @@ Return only:
10
10
  - \`approve\`: no gate-blocking finding.
11
11
  - \`request_changes\`: evidence is missing, stale, contradictory, incomplete, or unsafe.
12
12
 
13
- ## Checks
14
-
15
- - \`architecture-plan\`: scope, affected files/contracts, Scaffold Manifest, dependencies, docs/generated context, proof points, Replan triggers, no task-only source comments.
16
- - \`validation-adequacy\`: review report covers the plan, public contracts, validation level, commands/results, skips/gaps/risks, final cleanup, durable testing docs impact.
17
- - \`final-diff\`: diff matches plan, no unapproved surface/dependency/docs, no \`VCM:CODE\`, no task-process comments, meaningful tests, fallible paths handled.
13
+ ## Architecture Plan Gate
14
+
15
+ Read \`.claude/agents/architect.md\`; use coder/reviewer definitions only when
16
+ judging implementation or validation boundaries. Verify the required plan
17
+ structure, evidence, Scaffold Manifest, proof points, Replan triggers, and no
18
+ task-only source comments.
19
+
20
+ Focus on architectural soundness. Request changes when module boundaries,
21
+ public surface impact, dependency direction, state ownership, lifecycle,
22
+ failure paths, concurrency/restart behavior, docs/generated-context impact, or
23
+ key design decisions are missing, contradictory, unsafe, left for coder to
24
+ guess, or conflict with current project architecture.
25
+
26
+ ## Validation Adequacy Gate
27
+
28
+ Read \`.claude/agents/reviewer.md\`; use architect/coder definitions to compare
29
+ validation against the plan and implementation test responsibilities. Verify
30
+ plan coverage, public contracts, validation level, commands/results,
31
+ skips/gaps/risks, final cleanup, and durable testing docs impact.
32
+
33
+ Focus on whether validation matches risk. Request changes when important user
34
+ or system paths lack integration or E2E case coverage, or when the review
35
+ report does not explain why such coverage is unnecessary or unavailable. Pay
36
+ special attention to module boundaries, public contracts, UI flows,
37
+ CLI/tooling, hooks, sessions, persistence, worktrees, and external process
38
+ behavior.
39
+
40
+ ## Final Diff Gate
41
+
42
+ Read \`.claude/agents/coder.md\`; use architect/reviewer definitions to compare
43
+ the final diff against the approved plan and validation evidence. Check that
44
+ the diff matches plan, has no unapproved surface/dependency/docs changes, no
45
+ \`VCM:CODE\`, no task-process comments, meaningful tests, and fallible paths
46
+ handled.
47
+
48
+ Focus on code quality and boundary-condition robustness. Request changes when
49
+ the code violates project style, duplicates existing patterns unnecessarily,
50
+ adds avoidable abstraction, leaves debug/task-only artifacts, handles errors
51
+ inconsistently, changes files outside scope, weakens tests, or misses important
52
+ boundary conditions: empty/missing inputs, invalid data, permissions, external
53
+ command failure, partial writes, retries, concurrency, repeated UI actions,
54
+ stale state, restart recovery, cleanup, compatibility, or public API
55
+ validation.
18
56
 
19
57
  ## Output
20
58