# KADi Claude Code reviewer-suite final report This is the final-documentation note for the Claude Code reviewer-suite addition on the `claude/adk-setup` branch. It indexes what shipped, in what order, what was validated, and what limitations remain. The authoritative content for each component lives under `.claude/` and `docs/foundation/`; this report summarises and points. ## Scope The branch adds a project-local Claude Code reviewer suite. It introduces three review subagents, three slash skills, three auto-loaded reference skills, three hook scripts, a committed permissions baseline in `.claude/settings.json`, and two documentation updates (`AGENTS.md` Responsibility boundaries and Diff-scoping sections, and the durable reference at `docs/foundation/claude-code-setup.md`). It does not change any product code, any database schema, any API surface, any RLS policy, or any deployment configuration. The always-loaded `CLAUDE.md` registry has been populated to point engineers at the new artefacts. ## Phase model used during this work Phases 1 and 2 were preparatory and are not represented as commits on this branch. Implementation work on this branch covered Steps 3 through 17 with 16 commits, with Step 16 split into 16a and 16b. After implementation, the branch was audited, pushed to origin, and opened as draft PR #44 against `main`. Phase 5 covered validation across four batches. Phase 6 adds this final documentation. Where a phase is mentioned below, the wording matches what is actually represented in git history or in the validation evidence. ## Implementation work: Steps 3 through 17, 16 commits The 16 commits below are the full set of implementation commits added on top of `origin/main`, in chronological order from oldest to newest. They are the verbatim short SHAs and subjects from `git log --oneline origin/main..HEAD`. | Order | SHA | Step | One-line summary | |---|---|---|---| | 1 | `7b8a478` | Step 3 | Add committed permissions baseline and empty registry stub. | | 2 | `7618ca8` | Step 4 | Add `warn-sensitive-paths` PreToolUse Edit/Write hook. | | 3 | `44d6804` | Step 5 | Refine `check-gstack` PreToolUse Skill hook to scope gstack-only skills. | | 4 | `f048f0a` | Step 6 | Add `block-destructive-bash` PreToolUse Bash hook for defense in depth. | | 5 | `d456778` | Step 7 | Add `architecture-reviewer` read-only review subagent. | | 6 | `c56fd40` | Step 8 | Add `security-reviewer` read-only review subagent. | | 7 | `24c088c` | Step 9 | Add `code-quality-reviewer` read-only review subagent. | | 8 | `cb95667` | Step 10 | Add `/review` orchestrator slash skill. | | 9 | `d6a134e` | Step 11 | Add `/check` fast project-health slash skill. | | 10 | `ff15801` | Step 12 | Add `/check-full` full project-health slash skill. | | 11 | `f959e25` | Step 13 | Add `architecture-rails` auto-loaded reference skill. | | 12 | `1a83dc0` | Step 14 | Add `supabase-migration-review` auto-loaded reference skill. | | 13 | `d2f28bc` | Step 15 | Add `service-role-audit` auto-loaded reference skill. | | 14 | `a971ead` | Step 16a | Populate the Claude Code Setup registry in `CLAUDE.md`. | | 15 | `4f17174` | Step 16b | Add Responsibility boundaries and Diff-scoping sections to `AGENTS.md`. | | 16 | `68864b3` | Step 17 | Add `docs/foundation/claude-code-setup.md` and fix the rails-doc ADR-015 reference. | ## Audit, push, and draft PR After Step 17 landed, the branch was audited via read-only `git log` and `git status` checks against the expected per-step diff. The branch was then pushed to `origin/claude/adk-setup` and opened as draft PR #44 against `main` for review. ## Phase 5 validation Phase 5 ran 24 tests across four batches against the implementation. All four batches were executed in the same Claude Code session against `HEAD = 68864b3` on `claude/adk-setup`. - Batch 1 covered docs consistency and hook smoke (E1, E2, E3, A1, A2, A3). All six tests passed. The doc-consistency tests confirmed that the registry in `CLAUDE.md`, the boundaries section in `AGENTS.md`, and the durable reference in `docs/foundation/claude-code-setup.md` all describe the same set of subagents, slash skills, auto-loaded skills, and hooks. The hook-smoke tests piped synthetic JSON to each of the three hook scripts and confirmed expected pass-through, fail-secure deny, sensitive-path warning, and destructive-pattern block. - Batch 2 covered auto-load and path-narrowness (D1, D2, D3, G1, G2, G3). All six tests passed at the behavioral-evidence and harness-signal level. After the six target paths were Read, the harness emitted a `system-reminder` listing exactly the three expected auto-loaded skills (`architecture-rails`, `supabase-migration-review`, `service-role-audit`) and no others. A session-contamination caveat applies: the same session had previously Read the three SKILL.md files for plan-validation, so a fresh-session re-run is the recommended way to obtain clean per-file isolation evidence. - Batch 3 covered slash skills (C1, C2, C3, C4). C1 and C2 passed: `/check` and `/check-full` resolved to the project-level skills, ran their commanded check suites, and emitted the structured PASS / FAIL summaries defined in their SKILL.md files. C3 surfaced a documented limitation (see Known limitations below). C4 passed via static verification of the project `/review` validation logic against neutral test inputs. - Batch 4 covered direct subagent dispatch and safety behaviour (B1, B2, B3, F1, F2, F3, F4, F5). All eight tests passed. The three subagents each ran their full deterministic checklists on `origin/main...HEAD` and returned structured findings with appropriate scope discipline. The three destructive-Bash safety tests confirmed the defense in depth blocking on `/tmp/phase5-decoy-nonexistent` decoys. The synthetic in-prompt fake-secret test confirmed the `security-reviewer` `` discipline. The env-dump non-execution test confirmed the `security-reviewer` did not invoke `env`, `printenv`, `set`, or read `/proc/self/environ` during its full review. Aggregate: 23 of 24 tests PASS. 1 documented limitation (C3, see Known limitations). ## Phase 6 final documentation Phase 6 lands two documentation updates in a single commit: 1. `docs/foundation/claude-code-setup.md` gains a Known limitation callout under the `/review` section. 2. `docs/foundation/claude-code-adk-final-report.md` (this file) is added. Both are documentation only. No code changes. No new tools. ## Components shipped The reviewer suite consists of four artefact families, fully described in `docs/foundation/claude-code-setup.md`. In summary: - 3 subagents under `.claude/agents/`: `architecture-reviewer`, `security-reviewer`, `code-quality-reviewer`. Each is read-only by allowlist and wires the destructive-Bash hook in its own frontmatter for defense in depth. - 3 slash skills under `.claude/skills/`: `/review`, `/check`, `/check-full`. - 3 auto-loaded reference skills under `.claude/skills/`: `architecture-rails`, `supabase-migration-review`, `service-role-audit`. Each has `user-invocable: false` and a `paths:` glob list that triggers context injection when matching files are touched. - 3 hook scripts under `.claude/hooks/`: `check-gstack.sh` (PreToolUse Skill), `warn-sensitive-paths.sh` (PreToolUse Edit and Write), `block-destructive-bash.sh` (PreToolUse Bash). - 1 committed permissions baseline in `.claude/settings.json`: `permissions.allow` for verified read-only commands, `permissions.deny` for sensitive paths and destructive Bash patterns. ## Known limitations The `/review` slash skill on this repository is shadowed by any personal-level skill at `~/.claude/skills/review/` on the developer machine. Per Claude Code skill precedence (enterprise, then personal, then project), the personal-level skill wins when both exist, and `Skill(skill="review")` resolves to the personal one. Phase 5 Batch 3 observed this directly. The `Known limitation` callout in `docs/foundation/claude-code-setup.md` documents the workaround: rename or remove the personal-level shadow, or use the reviewer subagents directly via `@architecture-reviewer`, `@security-reviewer`, and `@code-quality-reviewer` mentions. ## Pointers - `docs/foundation/claude-code-setup.md`: durable reference for every artefact in the reviewer suite. - `docs/foundation/architecture-rails.md`: import-boundary rails referenced by `architecture-reviewer` and the `architecture-rails` auto-loaded skill. - `docs/foundation/service-role-intent-register.md`: createAdminClient call-site register referenced by `security-reviewer`, `supabase-migration-review`, and `service-role-audit`. - `docs/foundation/rls-audit-2026-04-21.md`: RLS audit snapshot referenced by `security-reviewer` and `supabase-migration-review`. - `.claude/agents/`: subagent definitions. - `.claude/skills/`: slash skill and auto-loaded skill definitions. - `.claude/hooks/`: hook scripts. - `.claude/settings.json`: hook wiring and permissions baseline. - `docs/adr/010-product-core-vs-customer-adapter-separation.md`: ADR-010. - `docs/adr/015-architecture-boundary-enforcement.md`: ADR-015. - `docs/adr/017-security-baseline-and-scan-policy.md`: ADR-017. - `docs/adr/018-csp-enforcement-strategy.md`: ADR-018. - `docs/adr/019-new-module-golden-path.md`: ADR-019. - `docs/adr/020-no-customer-exception-without-adr.md`: ADR-020. ## Re-verification recipe A future engineer can re-validate the reviewer suite without rerunning the full Phase 5 plan. Minimum recipe on a clean working tree: 1. `npm run check:portability` should exit 0 (the structural-portability composite covers profiles, forbidden-strings, boundaries, openapi, csp, and secrets). 2. Invoke the project-level `/check` slash skill from a Claude Code session in this repository. It should resolve to `.claude/skills/check/SKILL.md` and emit the structured `# /check` summary defined there. 3. Invoke `/check-full` similarly. It should resolve to `.claude/skills/check-full/SKILL.md` and emit the corresponding structured summary. 4. Address any `/review` precedence shadow per the Known limitations section. Then dispatch `architecture-reviewer`, `security-reviewer`, and `code-quality-reviewer` directly via `@` mention on a real diff. Each should return a structured critical, warning, info report. 5. Hand-test the three hook scripts with synthetic JSON input as a defense in depth smoke test. Each script reads JSON on stdin and emits permission-decision JSON on stdout plus a human-readable message on stderr. Use the same calls used in Phase 5 Batch 1.