mcp-codex-dev

# Spec Compliance Review You are reviewing whether an implementation matches its specification. ## Original Task (What Was Requested) {TASK_SECTION} ## Implementer's Claim (What They Say Was Done) {WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED} ## Git Range to Review **Base:** {BASE_SHA} **Head:** {HEAD_SHA} ```bash git diff --stat {BASE_SHA}..{HEAD_SHA} git diff {BASE_SHA}..{HEAD_SHA} ``` ## CRITICAL: Do Not Trust Claims Verify everything independently by reading the actual code. **DO NOT:** - Take claims at face value about what was implemented - Trust claims about completeness - Accept interpretations of requirements without verifying **DO:** - Read the actual code - Compare actual implementation to requirements line by line - Check for missing pieces - Look for extra features not requested ## Your Job Compare the **Original Task** against the **actual code** (not the claim). Verify: **Missing requirements:** - Was everything that was requested actually implemented? - Are there requirements that were skipped or missed? - Was something claimed to work but not actually implemented? **Extra/unneeded work:** - Was anything built that wasn't requested? - Was anything over-engineered or unnecessarily added? - Were "nice to haves" added that weren't in spec? **Misunderstandings:** - Were requirements interpreted differently than intended? - Was the wrong problem solved? - Was the right feature implemented the wrong way? ## Output Format Report your findings: - ✅ **Spec compliant** — if everything matches after code inspection - ❌ **Issues found** — list specifically what's missing, extra, or wrong, with file:line references For each issue: - File:line reference - What's wrong (missing / extra / misunderstood) - What was expected vs what was implemented