reviewer-protocol
Skill3.4k starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Reviewer rejection workflow and strict lockout semantics
8 other projects use a version of this, 7 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- microsoft/fsi-banking-payments-dispute-resolution-acceleratoredited, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- microsoft/github-vteam-industry-demosedited, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- microsoft/wazaedited, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- kubefleet-dev/kubefleetedited, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- dfrysinger/qrspi-plustheir own version, first seen Jun 19, 2026
- github/gh-awedited, first seen May 27, 2026
Other versions8 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 7
- github/gh-aw★ 5.6k83% same
- microsoft/waza★ 1.5k83% same
- Azure/fleet★ 22783% same
- kubefleet-dev/kubefleet★ 16483% same
- Azure/apiops-cli★ 3283% same
- microsoft/github-vteam-industry-demos★ 283% same
- microsoft/fsi-banking-payments-dispute-resolution-accelerator★ 083% same
Wrote their own version · 1
- dfrysinger/qrspi-plus★ 37same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository247 other files it gives its agents.
- .github/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- packages/squad-cli/templates/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- packages/squad-sdk/templates/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- .squad-templates/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- .squad/templates/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- templates/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- action-skill-contractsSkill
- agent-collaborationSkill
- agent-conductSkill
- architectural-proposalsSkill
- architectural-reviewSkill
- archival-integritySkill
- ci-validation-gatesSkill
- client-compatibilitySkill
- cli-wiringSkill
- content-scopeSkill
- distributed-meshSkill
- documentation-maintenanceSkill
- github-multi-accountSkill
- git-workflowSkill
- history-hygieneSkill
- init-modeSkill
- model-selectionSkill
- pr-lifecycleSkill
- protected-filesSkill
- release-processSkill
- reskillSkill
- secret-handlingSkill
- security-reviewSkill
- squad-conventionsSkill
- test-disciplineSkill
- windows-compatibilitySkill
- agentic-workflow-designerSkill
- gh-aw-reliabilitySkill
- iterative-retrievalSkill
- reflectSkill
- {skill-name}Skill
- agent-collaborationSkill
- agent-conductSkill
- architectural-proposalsSkill
- ci-validation-gatesSkill
- client-compatibilitySkill
- cli-wiringSkill
- coordinator-init-modeSkill
- coordinator-response-modeSkill
- coordinator-source-of-truthSkill
- cross-machine-coordinationSkill
- cross-squad-communicationSkill
- cross-squadSkill
- distributed-meshSkill
- docs-standardsSkill
- e2e-template-testingSkill
- economy-modeSkill
- error-recoverySkill
- external-commsSkill
- fact-checkingSkill
- gh-auth-isolationSkill
- gh-aw-enlistmentSkill
- github-multi-accountSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 5 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
5
Common
Most of the 8 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Common: line 19
When a team member has a Reviewer role:
- Common: line 26
If the Reviewer approves, work proceeds normally.
- Common: line 30
When an artifact is rejected by a Reviewer:
- Common: line 38
Deadlock handling: If all eligible agents have been locked out of an artifact, the Coordinator MUST escalate to the user rather than …
- Common: line 63
All 3 eligible agents are now locked out
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 8 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Context
When a team member has a Reviewer role (e.g., Tester, Code Reviewer, Lead), they may approve or reject work from other agents. On rejection, the coordinator enforces strict lockout rules to ensure the original author does NOT self-revise. This prevents defensive feedback loops and ensures independent review.
Patterns
Reviewer Rejection Protocol
Quality and test reviewers may block a PR or merge on quality, coverage, or regression grounds. Treat that block as a rejection that enters the protocol below.
When a team member has a Reviewer role:
- Reviewers may approve or reject work from other agents.
- On rejection, the Reviewer may choose ONE of:
- Reassign: Require a different agent to do the revision (not the original author).
- Escalate: Require a new agent be spawned with specific expertise.
- The Coordinator MUST enforce this. If the Reviewer says "someone else should fix this," the original agent does NOT get to self-revise.
- If the Reviewer approves, work proceeds normally.
Strict Lockout Semantics
When an artifact is rejected by a Reviewer:
- The original author is locked out. They may NOT produce the next version of that artifact. No exceptions.
- A different agent MUST own the revision. The Coordinator selects the revision author based on the Reviewer's recommendation (reassign or escalate).
- The Coordinator enforces this mechanically. Before spawning a revision agent, the Coordinator MUST verify that the selected agent is NOT the original author. If the Reviewer names the original author as the fix agent, the Coordinator MUST refuse and ask the Reviewer to name a different agent.
- The locked-out author may NOT contribute to the revision in any form — not as a co-author, advisor, or pair. The revision must be independently produced.
- Lockout scope: The lockout applies to the specific artifact that was rejected. The original author may still work on other unrelated artifacts.
- Lockout duration: The lockout persists for that revision cycle. If the revision is also rejected, the same rule applies again — the revision author is now also locked out, and a third agent must revise.
- Deadlock handling: If all eligible agents have been locked out of an artifact, the Coordinator MUST escalate to the user rather than re-admitting a locked-out author.
Examples
Example 1: Reassign after rejection
- Runtime Engineer writes authentication module
- Quality Engineer reviews → rejects: "Error handling is missing. Another engineer should fix this."
- Coordinator: Runtime Engineer is now locked out of this artifact
- Coordinator spawns a different engineer to revise the authentication module
- The revision engineer produces v2
- Quality Engineer reviews v2 → approves
- Lockout clears for next artifact
Example 2: Escalate for expertise
- Original Author writes TypeScript config
- Lead reviews → rejects: "Need someone with deeper TS knowledge. Escalate."
- Coordinator: Original Author is now locked out
- Coordinator spawns new agent (or existing TS expert) to revise
- New agent produces v2
- Lead reviews v2
Example 3: Deadlock handling
- Original Author writes module → rejected
- Revision Engineer revises → rejected
- Quality Engineer revises → rejected
- All 3 eligible agents are now locked out
- Coordinator: "All eligible agents have been locked out. Escalating to user: [artifact details]"
Example 4: Reviewer accidentally names original author
- Original Author writes module → rejected
- Quality Engineer says: "The original author should fix the error handling"
- Coordinator: "The original author is locked out. Please name a different agent."
- Quality Engineer names a revision engineer
- Coordinator spawns the revision engineer
Anti-Patterns
- ❌ Allowing the original author to self-revise after rejection
- ❌ Treating the locked-out author as an "advisor" or "co-author" on the revision
- ❌ Re-admitting a locked-out author when deadlock occurs (must escalate to user)
- ❌ Applying lockout across unrelated artifacts (scope is per-artifact)
- ❌ Accepting the Reviewer's assignment when they name the original author (must refuse and ask for a different agent)
- ❌ Clearing lockout before the revision is approved (lockout persists through revision cycle)
- ❌ Skipping verification that the revision agent is not the original author
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

