tearitapart

<skill id="tearitapart">

<purpose> Pre-implementation review. Check Big 5, security, testing, architecture. Goal: find real problems, not generic concerns. </purpose>

<skill_load> Load: skills/quality/SKILL.md, skills/build/reference/testing.md, skills/tearitapart/reference/security.md Reference: skills/quality/reference/quality-research.md </skill_load>

<on_start>

agentdb read-start

</on_start>

<phase id="1_gather">

• Read plan/spec
• List files to be touched
• Check git status
• Check AgentDB for prior contracts
• Read _meta/research/ for anti-patterns

output: scope: N files tier: 1|2|3 prior_work: contracts, research found </phase>

<phase id="2_big5"> Run Big 5 checks from skills/quality/SKILL.md:

1. input_validation: Zod schema? Parameterized queries?
2. edge_cases: null, empty, unicode, timeout?
3. error_handling: no empty catch? Logged with context?
4. duplication: same logic repeated?
5. complexity: functions < 30 lines?

Use quick_checks from quality skill for detection. </phase>

<phase id="3_security"> Load: skills/tearitapart/reference/security.md

critical:

• [ ] No hardcoded secrets
• [ ] Auth tokens in httpOnly cookies
• [ ] Rate limiting
• [ ] HTTPS enforced

injection:

• [ ] SQL: parameterized only
• [ ] XSS: DOMPurify
• [ ] CSRF: tokens on state changes </phase>

<phase id="4_testing"> Load: skills/build/reference/testing.md

verify:

• Tests exist BEFORE implementation?
• Edge cases covered?
• Assertions specific (not toBeTruthy)?
• Mocks at boundaries only?

red_flags:

• "Will add tests later"
• 100% coverage, weak assertions
• No error path testing </phase>

<phase id="5_architecture"> Load: skills/architecture/SKILL.md

verify:

• Follows existing patterns?
• Interface stability?
• Modular boundaries?
• Dependency direction correct? </phase>

<verdict> <PROCEED> No Big 5 violations. Security passes. Tests defined. Output: "PROCEED with caveats: [list]" </PROCEED>

<REVISE> 1-2 Big 5 violations (fixable). Missing security items. Output: "REVISE: [changes with file:line]" </REVISE>

<RETHINK> 3+ Big 5 violations. Fundamental security gaps. No tests. Output: "RETHINK: [why flawed] → [alternative]" </RETHINK>

<ask_user> Use AskUserQuestion when: verdict is REVISE or RETHINK Ask: "Verdict: {REVISE|RETHINK}. Want details on specific findings, or proceed with fixes?" Options: show details, proceed with fixes, override and proceed anyway </ask_user> </verdict>

<output_format> Save to _meta/reviews/{feature}-teardown.md:

# Tear Down: {feature}
reviewed: {timestamp}
tier: {1|2|3}
scope: {N files}

## Big 5
input_validation: pass|fail
edge_cases: pass|fail
error_handling: pass|fail
duplication: pass|fail
complexity: pass|fail

## Verdict: PROCEED | REVISE | RETHINK
{reasoning}

## Action Items
1. {fix with file:line}

</output_format>

<on_complete>

agentdb write-end '{"command":"tearitapart","verdict":"X","big5_violations":N}'

</on_complete>

</skill>