Skip to content

Fan out subagents for socratic-review's silent assessment - #32

Merged
stevepolitodesign merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
socratic-review-subagent-assessment
Jun 12, 2026
Merged

Fan out subagents for socratic-review's silent assessment#32
stevepolitodesign merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
socratic-review-subagent-assessment

Conversation

@stevepolitodesign

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

Updates socratic-review's Step 0: Silent Assessment so that large or unfamiliar review targets are explored by parallel subagents instead of read entirely inline on the main thread.

Why

An audit of the skills found socratic-review was the one skill doing substantial codebase analysis inline with no subagent isolation. explain and prior-art already run as forked Explore agents (context: fork), but socratic-review can't use that pattern — it's an interactive Socratic dialogue and must stay on the main thread to ask one question at a time. So the fan-out lives inside Step 0 and returns control to the conversation.

How

  • Proportional: small/self-contained targets are still read inline (subagents would cost more than they return). Fan-out is the default for multi-file PRs, SHAs, and inherited code.
  • One problem space per subagent (responsibility & coupling, clarity & design, security, performance, data integrity & error handling, testing & edge cases), dispatched concurrently.
  • Stays silent: subagents return findings only — no user contact, no review prose. Their reports are merged into the private ranked list and never surfaced, preserving the Socratic frame.
  • Steps 1–4, the question banks, and the tone section are unchanged.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Step 0 previously read all code inline on the main thread. For large or
unfamiliar targets (multi-file PRs, SHAs, inherited code), dispatch one
subagent per problem space in parallel, then merge their findings into the
private ranked list. Small targets are still read inline to avoid overhead.
The assessment stays silent — subagent reports are never surfaced.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@stevepolitodesign
stevepolitodesign merged commit e87d982 into main Jun 12, 2026
2 checks passed
@stevepolitodesign
stevepolitodesign deleted the socratic-review-subagent-assessment branch June 12, 2026 13:51
stevepolitodesign added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 29, 2026
Step 0 has fanned out to subagents since #32, but the instruction was
vague enough to be unreliable. It said only "dispatch subagents" —
naming neither the tool nor the agent type — so how the assessment
actually got parallelized varied from session to session.

The bigger gap was what happened when the subagents came back. Nothing
told the reviewer to read the code itself, and it needs to: Step 1 opens
by naming what it sees, Step 2 leads the user into specific blind spots,
and Step 3 guides real refactoring moves. None of that is possible from
a list of smells with severity labels and line numbers.

The per-subagent brief now lives in `references/smell-explorer.md`,
following the pattern feature-dev established. It asks for the evidence
behind each smell, not just its name, and it forbids review prose so the
orchestrator keeps control of what surfaces and when.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant