fable-review

# Fable Codebase Review ## Overview A scored, multi-pillar codebase review whose output is a report another agent (Opus) executes without re-deriving anything. The pillars and the report shape come from the first run of this review (issue #217, PR #218, overall 7.5 to 8.1); the rules below are what that run and its two follow-up reviews proved necessary. **Core principle: every finding was confirmed by reading the file it cites. A grep hit is a lead, not a finding, and a pillar score with no evidence under it is an opinion that does not get a number.** Second principle: the report is executed by an agent that cannot see this session. Anything a finding leaves implicit - the fix, the verification, the risk, the reason a nearby thing must not change - is work the executor will get wrong. ## Preconditions (check both before anything else) ### Clean context The review must start from a clean context. A session that has already done implementation work carries the assumptions it made while working, and it will grade its own output: gates it stopped checking read as green, code it wrote reads as idiomatic, and drift it introduced becomes invisible. Re-running these checks from a fresh context is the point of the review. If this session already holds prior work - edits, debugging, a long conversation, or anything beyond the invocation itself - **stop** and say: > This review needs a clean context. Start a fresh session (`/clear`, or > `claude -p "/fable-review"` from a new ...