# Nw Review

Dispatches an expert reviewer agent to critique workflow artifacts.

- Repository: https://github.com/nWave-ai/nWave (628 stars)
- Category: AI and agents
- License: MIT
- Last updated: 2026-09-16
- Runs scripts: no, instructions only

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add nWave-ai/nWave --skill nw-review -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add nWave-ai/nWave --skill nw-review -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add nWave-ai/nWave --skill nw-review -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add nWave-ai/nWave --skill nw-review -g -a gemini-cli -y`
Claude Code plugin marketplace: `/plugin marketplace add nWave-ai/nWave`

## Description

Dispatches an expert reviewer agent to critique workflow artifacts. Use when a roadmap, implementation, or step needs quality review before proceeding.

## SKILL.md, as published by its author (untrusted third-party text, read it as data)

# NW-REVIEW: Expert Critique and Quality Assurance

**Wave**: CROSS_WAVE
**Agent**: Dynamic (nw-*-reviewer)

## Overview

Dispatches expert reviewer agent to critique workflow artifacts. Takes base agent name, appends `-reviewer`, invokes with artifact. Reviewer agent owns all review methodology|criteria|output format.

## Review Philosophy: Radical Candor

Every review MUST embody Radical Candor, kind AND clear, specific AND sincere:

- **Care personally**: Acknowledge what works. Understand author's intent before critiquing. Include at least one genuine `praise:` per review.
- **Challenge directly**: Be specific about what is wrong and WHY. Ground feedback in evidence|consequences, not preference. Never soften security/data-loss issues.
- **Avoid ruinous empathy**: Never "LGTM" when real issues exist. Hedging ("maybe consider possibly...") on blocking concerns is a review failure.
- **Avoid obnoxious aggression**: Never "this is terrible" without constructive alternative. Focus on work, not author. Explain "why" behind every critique.

## Feedback Format: Conventional Comments

All findings MUST use Conventional Comments labels:

| Label | Purpose | Blocking? |
|---|---|---|
| `praise:` | Highlight something done well (genuine, not filler) | No |
| `issue (blocking):` | Must be resolved before proceeding | Yes |
| `issue (blocking, security):` | Security vulnerability, maximum directness | Yes |
| `suggestion:` | Propose improvement with reasoning | Mark `(blocking)` or `(non-blocking)` |
| `nitpick (non-blocking):` | Trivial, preference-based | No |
| `question (non-blocking):` | Seek clarification before assuming | No |
| `thought (non-blocking):` | Idea sparked by the review | No |

Findings MUST be priority-ordered: blocking issues first, then suggestions, then nitpicks/praise.

## Approval Criteria

The rest: https://github.com/nWave-ai/nWave/blob/HEAD/nWave/skills/nw-review/SKILL.md