Five-axis self-review on the v1.0.0 scaffold caught two Required-severity
findings:
1. CORRECTNESS — SKILL.md 'When to invoke' said 'before Phase 4
verification publishes the change', but dev-sop.md treats Phase 4 AS
the self-review (with verification as a sub-step). Internally
contradictory between the two docs shipped together. Tightened the
wording: this skill IS the Phase 4 procedure; verification chain
takes over after the skill's output goes into the PR description.
2. ARCHITECTURE — Plugin repo was missing the validate-plugin reusable
workflow that every sibling plugin (e.g. molecule-skill-code-review)
calls. Without it, manifest-shape regressions ship silently. Added
.github/workflows/ci.yml invoking
molecule-ai/molecule-ci/.github/workflows/validate-plugin.yml@main —
one-line file, parity with siblings.
Also took an Optional finding while there: SKILL.md output template
showed angle-bracket placeholders and '(or)' meta-prefixes that an agent
following the example literally might paste verbatim. Replaced the
abstract template with a concrete worked example (using the real
findings from the !external resolver work that drove this skill's
existence: cache validity, token persistence, naming). Self-documenting.
WHY THE STRUCTURED REVIEW CAUGHT THESE
Both findings would have shipped silently with a 3-weakest pass on
the same code — the contradiction is between two files and you'd have
to read them adjacent to each other; the missing CI gate isn't visible
in either file's diff. The Architecture axis caught the gate gap by
asking 'follows existing patterns? sibling plugins all have one'.
The Correctness axis caught the wording by asking 'does this match
the spec?' and reading dev-sop.md's actual Phase 4 definition.
REFS
v1.0.0 ship — internal#85 (RFC), internal#84 (SOP doc PR)
Sibling plugin shape — molecule-skill-code-review
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
8d88f3ebf4