feat: gate lgtm on robot review acceptance

README.md

@@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ Required fields:
 | `scope` | What the reviewer inspected |
 | `observations` | Concrete observations only. No advice, verdicts, or editorial |
 | `blind_spots` | What the reviewer did not inspect or could not verify |
+| `accepted` | Overall accept/reject decision for whether the task is ready to advance |
 | `evidence_complete` | Whether the supplied evidence actually covers the done criterion |
 | `evidence_convincing` | Whether the supplied evidence would convince a skeptical reviewer |
 | `missing_evidence` | Concrete missing checks or artifacts needed before human sign-off |
@@ -127,7 +128,7 @@ PI_LGTM_ROBOT_REVIEW_CMD='acpx --approve-reads --non-interactive-permissions den
 PI_LGTM_AUTO_ROBOT_REVIEW=1
 ```
 
-This appends a new robot-review iteration. If the latest robot review sets `evidence_complete=false` or `evidence_convincing=false`, `/lgtm` is blocked until stronger evidence is submitted and reviewed again.
+This appends a new robot-review iteration. The reviewer returns an explicit `accepted` boolean as well as detailed observations, blind spots, and missing evidence. If the latest robot review rejects the evidence, `/lgtm` is blocked until stronger evidence is submitted and reviewed again.
 
 ## Commands
 

src/index.ts

@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ import { AutoClearManager } from "./auto-clear.js";
 import { getReviewBadges, REVIEW_BADGES } from "./review-badges.js";
 import {
   appendRobotReviewMetadata,
+  getLatestRobotReview,
   getRobotReviews,
   latestRobotReviewPasses,
   type RobotReviewRecord,
@@ -80,6 +81,7 @@ function formatRobotReview(review: RobotReviewRecord): string {
     `Robot review #${review.iteration} (${review.submitted_at})`,
     `Reviewer: ${review.reviewer}${review.mode === "auto" ? " [auto]" : ""}`,
     `Scope: ${review.scope}`,
+    `Accepted: ${review.accepted ? "yes" : "no"}`,
     `Evidence complete: ${review.evidence_complete ? "yes" : "no"}`,
     `Evidence convincing: ${review.evidence_convincing ? "yes" : "no"}`,
     `Observations:\n- ${review.observations.join("\n- ")}`,
@@ -101,7 +103,7 @@ function buildRobotReviewPrompt(task: any): string {
     "Set evidence_convincing=false if the evidence exists but would not convince a skeptical reviewer.",
     "Return exactly one JSON object between the markers ROBOT_REVIEW_JSON_START and ROBOT_REVIEW_JSON_END.",
     "JSON schema:",
-    '{"reviewer":"string","scope":"string","observations":["string"],"blind_spots":"string","evidence_complete":true,"evidence_convincing":true,"missing_evidence":["string"]}',
+    '{"reviewer":"string","scope":"string","observations":["string"],"blind_spots":"string","accepted":true,"evidence_complete":true,"evidence_convincing":true,"missing_evidence":["string"]}',
     "",
     `Task #${task.id}: ${task.subject}`,
     `Done criterion: ${task.done_criterion}`,
@@ -117,7 +119,7 @@ function buildRobotReviewPrompt(task: any): string {
     priorSection,
     "Output format:",
     "ROBOT_REVIEW_JSON_START",
-    '{"reviewer":"...","scope":"...","observations":["..."],"blind_spots":"...","evidence_complete":true,"evidence_convincing":true,"missing_evidence":["..."]}',
+    '{"reviewer":"...","scope":"...","observations":["..."],"blind_spots":"...","accepted":true,"evidence_complete":true,"evidence_convincing":true,"missing_evidence":["..."]}',
     "ROBOT_REVIEW_JSON_END",
   ].join("\n");
 }
@@ -147,6 +149,9 @@ async function runAutomaticRobotReview(
       scope: typeof parsed.scope === "string" ? parsed.scope : "task evidence package",
       observations,
       blind_spots: typeof parsed.blind_spots === "string" ? parsed.blind_spots : "not stated",
+      accepted: typeof parsed.accepted === "boolean"
+        ? parsed.accepted
+        : parsed.evidence_complete === true && parsed.evidence_convincing === true,
       evidence_complete: parsed.evidence_complete === true,
       evidence_convincing: parsed.evidence_convincing === true,
       missing_evidence,
@@ -249,6 +254,27 @@ export default function (pi: ExtensionAPI) {
     showPersistedTasks();
   });
 
+  pi.on("before_agent_start", async (event) => {
+    const followups = store.list().flatMap(task => {
+      const latest = getLatestRobotReview(task);
+      return latest && !latest.accepted ? [{ task, latest }] : [];
+    });
+    if (followups.length === 0) return undefined;
+
+    const reminder = followups.map(({ task, latest }) => {
+      const missing = latest.missing_evidence.length > 0
+        ? ` Missing evidence: ${latest.missing_evidence.join("; ")}.`
+        : "";
+      return `- Task #${task.id} ${task.subject}: latest robot review rejected the evidence.${missing} Strengthen the evidence, call lgtm_ask again, then rerun robot_review_run before asking for human sign-off.`;
+    }).join("\n");
+
+    return {
+      systemPrompt:
+        event.systemPrompt +
+        `\n\n<system-reminder>\nLatest robot review follow-up required:\n${reminder}\nDo not ask for human sign-off until the latest robot review accepts the evidence.\n</system-reminder>\n`,
+    };
+  });
+
   pi.on("session_switch" as any, async (event: any, ctx: ExtensionContext) => {
     widget.setUICtx(ctx.ui as UICtx);
     const isResume = event?.reason === "resume";
@@ -578,6 +604,7 @@ This does not complete the task. Human /lgtm remains the only completion path.`,
       blind_spots: Type.String({ description: "What the reviewer did not inspect or could not verify" }),
       evidence_complete: Type.Boolean({ description: "Whether the supplied evidence covers the claimed done criterion." }),
       evidence_convincing: Type.Boolean({ description: "Whether the supplied evidence would convince a skeptical reviewer." }),
+      accepted: Type.Optional(Type.Boolean({ description: "Overall review decision. Defaults to evidence_complete && evidence_convincing." })),
       missing_evidence: Type.Optional(Type.Array(Type.String(), { description: "Concrete missing checks, artifacts, or observations needed before human sign-off." })),
     }),
 
@@ -594,6 +621,7 @@ This does not complete the task. Human /lgtm remains the only completion path.`,
             scope: params.scope,
             observations: params.observations,
             blind_spots: params.blind_spots,
+            accepted: params.accepted ?? (params.evidence_complete && params.evidence_convincing),
             evidence_complete: params.evidence_complete,
             evidence_convincing: params.evidence_convincing,
             missing_evidence: params.missing_evidence ?? [],
@@ -609,6 +637,7 @@ This does not complete the task. Human /lgtm remains the only completion path.`,
         `Iteration: ${getRobotReviews(store.get(params.taskId)!).length}\n` +
         `Reviewer: ${params.reviewer}\n` +
         `Scope: ${params.scope}\n\n` +
+        `Accepted: ${(params.accepted ?? (params.evidence_complete && params.evidence_convincing)) ? "yes" : "no"}\n` +
         `Evidence complete: ${params.evidence_complete ? "yes" : "no"}\n` +
         `Evidence convincing: ${params.evidence_convincing ? "yes" : "no"}\n\n` +
         `### Observations\n${params.observations.map(o => `- ${o}`).join("\n")}\n\n` +
@@ -651,6 +680,7 @@ This appends a new robot-review iteration. If the reviewer marks evidence incomp
         `## Automatic robot review for task #${task.id}: ${task.subject}\n` +
         `Reviewer command: ${command}\n` +
         `Iteration: ${getRobotReviews(store.get(params.taskId)!).length}\n` +
+        `Accepted: ${review.accepted ? "yes" : "no"}\n` +
         `Evidence complete: ${review.evidence_complete ? "yes" : "no"}\n` +
         `Evidence convincing: ${review.evidence_convincing ? "yes" : "no"}\n\n` +
         `### Observations\n${review.observations.map(o => `- ${o}`).join("\n")}\n\n` +

src/robot-review.ts

@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ export interface RobotReviewRecord {
   scope: string;
   observations: string[];
   blind_spots: string;
+  accepted: boolean;
   evidence_complete: boolean;
   evidence_convincing: boolean;
   missing_evidence: string[];
@@ -33,6 +34,10 @@ function normalizeReview(value: unknown, index: number): RobotReviewRecord | und
     scope,
     observations,
     blind_spots: typeof review.blind_spots === "string" ? review.blind_spots : "not recorded",
+    accepted: typeof review.accepted === "boolean"
+      ? review.accepted
+      : (typeof review.evidence_complete === "boolean" ? review.evidence_complete : true)
+        && (typeof review.evidence_convincing === "boolean" ? review.evidence_convincing : true),
     evidence_complete: typeof review.evidence_complete === "boolean" ? review.evidence_complete : true,
     evidence_convincing: typeof review.evidence_convincing === "boolean" ? review.evidence_convincing : true,
     missing_evidence: toStringArray(review.missing_evidence),
@@ -51,6 +56,10 @@ function getLegacyRobotReview(task: Task): RobotReviewRecord | undefined {
     scope: typeof task.metadata?.robot_review_scope === "string" ? task.metadata.robot_review_scope : "unknown",
     observations,
     blind_spots: typeof task.metadata?.robot_review_blind_spots === "string" ? task.metadata.robot_review_blind_spots : "not recorded",
+    accepted: typeof task.metadata?.robot_review_accepted === "boolean"
+      ? task.metadata.robot_review_accepted
+      : (typeof task.metadata?.robot_review_evidence_complete === "boolean" ? task.metadata.robot_review_evidence_complete : true)
+        && (typeof task.metadata?.robot_review_evidence_convincing === "boolean" ? task.metadata.robot_review_evidence_convincing : true),
     evidence_complete: typeof task.metadata?.robot_review_evidence_complete === "boolean" ? task.metadata.robot_review_evidence_complete : true,
     evidence_convincing: typeof task.metadata?.robot_review_evidence_convincing === "boolean" ? task.metadata.robot_review_evidence_convincing : true,
     missing_evidence: toStringArray(task.metadata?.robot_review_missing_evidence),
@@ -81,6 +90,7 @@ export function getLatestRobotReview(task: Task): RobotReviewRecord | undefined
 export function appendRobotReviewMetadata(task: Task, review: Omit<RobotReviewRecord, "iteration">): Record<string, unknown> {
   const robot_reviews = [...getRobotReviews(task), { ...review, iteration: 0 }].map((entry, index) => ({
     ...entry,
+    accepted: entry.accepted,
     iteration: index + 1,
   }));
   const latest = robot_reviews[robot_reviews.length - 1];
@@ -90,6 +100,7 @@ export function appendRobotReviewMetadata(task: Task, review: Omit<RobotReviewRe
     robot_review_scope: latest.scope,
     robot_review_observations: latest.observations,
     robot_review_blind_spots: latest.blind_spots,
+    robot_review_accepted: latest.accepted,
     robot_review_evidence_complete: latest.evidence_complete,
     robot_review_evidence_convincing: latest.evidence_convincing,
     robot_review_missing_evidence: latest.missing_evidence,
@@ -103,5 +114,5 @@ export function appendRobotReviewMetadata(task: Task, review: Omit<RobotReviewRe
 
 export function latestRobotReviewPasses(task: Task): boolean {
   const latest = getLatestRobotReview(task);
-  return latest ? latest.evidence_complete && latest.evidence_convincing : false;
+  return latest ? latest.accepted : false;
 }

test/review-badges.test.ts

@@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ describe("getReviewBadges", () => {
           scope: "task evidence",
           observations: ["Observed one unchecked edge case"],
           blind_spots: "Did not inspect prod traffic",
+          accepted: false,
           evidence_complete: false,
           evidence_convincing: false,
           missing_evidence: ["Prod traffic sample"],

test/robot-review.test.ts

@@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ describe("robot review helpers", () => {
     expect(reviews).toHaveLength(1);
     expect(reviews[0].reviewer).toBe("opencode");
     expect(reviews[0].iteration).toBe(1);
+    expect(reviews[0].accepted).toBe(true);
   });
 
   it("appends robot reviews as iterations", () => {
@@ -45,6 +46,7 @@ describe("robot review helpers", () => {
       scope: "task evidence",
       observations: ["Observed missing benchmark output"],
       blind_spots: "Did not inspect prod config",
+      accepted: false,
       evidence_complete: false,
       evidence_convincing: false,
       missing_evidence: ["Benchmark output for the claimed speedup"],
@@ -57,6 +59,7 @@ describe("robot review helpers", () => {
       scope: "updated task evidence",
       observations: ["Observed benchmark output and test transcript"],
       blind_spots: "Did not inspect long-run stability",
+      accepted: true,
       evidence_complete: true,
       evidence_convincing: true,
       missing_evidence: [],