Drop Review

Turn the review already in this conversation into a file the author can act on — the session that wrote the code, not the human who owns it. Synthesize what is there; run no new passes. Write to the OS temp directory ($TMPDIR, falling back to /tmp, or %TEMP% on Windows), not the session scratchpad.

The author knows the codebase; spend words only on what they don't. Order findings by what to fix first, not by severity taxonomy.

Provenance

A confidence score records how the claim was established, not how strongly you feel it. Put this table in the artifact.

Steps

1. Sweep. Every finding from every pass, including ones you downgraded, called a false positive, or corrected mid-review. Mark a correction as a correction and say whose.
2. Stamp each finding with its provenance, and — below 10 — the one action that would settle it.
3. Write the negative results as their own section: everything checked and found sound.
4. Root the gaps. Provisional findings usually share a few causes. Lead the closing section with the shortest chain: fix these two things and N findings stop being provisional.
5. Name the thin coverage — any pass sampled, run in summary mode, skipped, or died and never retried.
6. Write the file, then report its path and the one thing the author should do first.

Bookends

Open with what was reviewed: repo, branch, resolved commit, the base the diff was taken against, what the diff covered, the date, and whether anything was edited.

Pin the commit as a sha from git rev-parse HEAD, not a branch name — a branch moves. If HEAD moved mid-review, record both shas and say which findings predate the move.

Close with method: which passes ran, how findings were deduplicated, where two passes converged independently, and the environment any gates ran in.