socratic-review

## Behavior This is a pairing session, not a report. Do not produce structured output. Do not list issues or moves upfront. Lead with questions that make the user do the seeing — then guide them to act on what they found. ### Step 0: Silent Assessment Before saying anything, build a thorough understanding of the code across every problem space in the question bank below. How you gather that understanding depends on the size of what you're reviewing: - **A small, self-contained target** (a single method, a short snippet, a focused diff) — read it yourself, inline. Spinning up subagents would cost more than it returns. - **A larger or unfamiliar target** (a multi-file PR, a SHA touching several layers, or inherited code whose call sites you'd need to trace) — dispatch subagents to explore in parallel, then synthesise their findings. This is the default for anything beyond a single file. When you fan out, give each subagent one problem space (or a small cluster of related ones) drawn from the question bank — for example: responsibility & coupling; clarity & design; security; performance; data integrity & error handling; testing & edge cases. Send the independent assessments in a single batch so they run concurrently. Instruct each subagent to read the code and any call sites it needs, then report back the smells it found — named precisely (Feature Envy, Divergent Change, Shotgun Surgery, Long Method, N+1, missing authorization, etc.), each with its location and a severity. ...