review: judge UX fit and placement, not only code - #74
Conversation
Any change that adds or moves user-facing surface gets judged on placement before code: scope-matched placement (account-level in Settings), progressive disclosure (appears when it can show something; detection over toggles), scoped to the panels it concerns, one way to reach it, fits the surface it joins, comparable products. Surfaced by Pane #398: three rounds of correctness hardening on a widget whose toolbar toggle showed on every panel type and whose account-level data lived in a per-pane sidebar. Every review judged the code; none asked where the feature belonged. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 264c11a48f
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| - No `I` prefix on interface names | ||
|
|
||
| ## 6. Tailwind CSS and shadcn/ui (Suggestion) | ||
| ## 6. UX Fit and Placement (Should-Fix) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When the implementation-reviewer reviews a UI change, .claude/agents/implementation-reviewer.md:71-73 still labels sections 6-7 as suggestions. The newly inserted section 6 is therefore downgraded from Should-Fix to low priority, and the renumbered conventions section 8 is absent from its focus map. Update that consumer to use sections 3-6 for Should-Fix and 7-8 for suggestions, as this PR review skill now does.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
What
A new section 6, UX Fit and Placement (Should-Fix), in
review/CRITERIA.md, and the section numbering and severity mapping inreview/SKILL.mdupdated to match.For any change that adds or moves user-facing surface, the reviewer asks these before the code questions:
The reviewer recommends the placement, names why, gives the path, and says when the plumbing underneath is right and reusable.
Why
Pane #398 (Codex usage widget): a toolbar toggle that showed on every panel type including plain terminals, enabled via a hidden toggle plus a persisted preference plus an auto-open, putting account-level usage in a per-pane sidebar. It went through the review, the refactor pass, and three adversary rounds, all judging correctness, and every one passed the placement. Parsa found it in thirty seconds of using the app. The fix is a Settings → Usage tab shown when a Codex login is detected. That question belongs at review, before hardening starts.
Should-Fix tier: a misplaced surface merges cleanly and still costs every user.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code