ase-meta-review

@${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-control.md @${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-skill.md @${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../meta/ase-getopt.md <skill name="ase-meta-review"> Review Staged Changes </skill> <expand name="getopt" arg1="ase-meta-review" arg2="--severity|-S=(LOW|MEDIUM|HIGH)"> $ARGUMENTS </expand> <objective> Review the currently staged Git changes the way an *experienced human reviewer* would - judging them *holistically* against the change's *own intent* and against *correctness*, *design fit*, *clarity*, *robustness*, and *project-convention conformance* - and emit a single *approve / request-changes verdict* backed by *prioritized*, *severity-tagged*, *line-cited* findings. This is a *synthesizing critique*, not a mechanical scan: it complements `ase-code-lint` (mechanical quality), `ase-code-analyze` (logic/semantics), and `ase-meta-diff` (intent narrative and risk). </objective> Procedure --------- <flow> 1. <step id="STEP 1: Determine Change Set"> 1. Determine *whether there are staged changes at all* by running the corresponding command (taken exactly as given) and capturing its output - the bare *list of staged file names* - into <diff/>. This is a lightweight gate; the full diff is fetched by the sub-agent in STEP 2, so capturing only the file-name list here is sufficient: `git diff --cached --name-only HEAD` 2. <if condition="<diff/> is empty"> Only output the following <template...