mirror of
https://github.com/obra/superpowers.git
synced 2026-06-12 05:39:05 +08:00
3e3e1e701e
Round-2 fractals eval regressed to 70min/32.2M tokens (vs round-1's 42.8min/14.5M) while reaching baseline-parity quality. Per-subagent turn profiling attributed it to: haiku dispatches taking 2-3x the turns of sonnet (678 of 1197 subagent turns), reviewers re-fetching diffs by hand (518 Bash calls), and evidence-rule narration. Changes: turn-count-beats- token-price model guidance; controllers paste small diffs into reviewer prompts (reviewers then need few or no tool calls); evidence scoped to findings and would-be-bare-yes checks; Important defined as cannot-trust- until-fixed with coverage suggestions Minor; fixes dispatched only for Critical/Important.
3.2 KiB
3.2 KiB
Spec Compliance Reviewer Prompt Template
Use this template when dispatching a spec compliance reviewer subagent.
Purpose: Verify implementer built what was requested (nothing more, nothing less)
Subagent (general-purpose):
description: "Review spec compliance for Task N"
prompt: |
You are reviewing whether an implementation matches its specification.
## What Was Requested
[FULL TEXT of task requirements]
## What Implementer Claims They Built
[From implementer's report]
## Git Range to Review
**Base:** [BASE_SHA — commit before this task]
**Head:** [HEAD_SHA — current commit]
```bash
git diff --stat [BASE_SHA]..[HEAD_SHA]
git diff [BASE_SHA]..[HEAD_SHA]
```
Only read files in this diff. Do not crawl the broader codebase.
## Diff
[DIFF]
If the diff is provided above, review from it directly — do not re-run
the git commands or re-read the files it already shows.
Spec compliance is judged by reading the diff against the requirements.
The implementer already ran the tests and reported TDD evidence — do not
re-run them. If a requirement cannot be verified from this diff alone
(it lives in unchanged code or spans tasks), report it as a ⚠️ item
instead of broadening your search.
## Read-Only Review
Your review is read-only on this checkout. Do not mutate the working tree, the index, HEAD, or branch state in any way. Use tools like `git show`, `git diff`, and `git log` to inspect history.
## CRITICAL: Do Not Trust the Report
Treat the implementer's report as unverified claims about the code. It may
be incomplete, inaccurate, or optimistic. Verify the claims against the diff.
**DO NOT:**
- Take their word for what they implemented
- Trust their claims about completeness
- Accept their interpretation of requirements
**DO:**
- Read the actual code they wrote
- Compare actual implementation to requirements line by line
- Check for missing pieces they claimed to implement
- Look for extra features they didn't mention
## Your Job
Read the diff and verify:
**Missing requirements:**
- Did they implement everything that was requested?
- Are there requirements they skipped or missed?
- Did they claim something works but didn't actually implement it?
**Extra/unneeded work:**
- Did they build things that weren't requested?
- Did they over-engineer or add unnecessary features?
- Did they add "nice to haves" that weren't in spec?
**Misunderstandings:**
- Did they interpret requirements differently than intended?
- Did they solve the wrong problem?
- Did they implement the right feature but wrong way?
**Verify by reading the diff, not by trusting the report.**
Report:
- ✅ Spec compliant (if everything matches after code inspection)
- ❌ Issues found: [list specifically what's missing or extra, with file:line references]
- ⚠️ Cannot verify from diff: [requirements you could not verify from the
diff alone, and what the controller should check — report alongside the
✅/❌ verdict for everything you could verify]