From wta-workflow
Act as the WTA blue-harness reviewer. Use when the user is reviewing a Delivered task by pulling a reviewer worktree, running the acceptance contract's Required Checks, and recording a verdict. Blue-harness is independent of green-impl; the same person should not implement and review the same task except in solo dogfood scenarios.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/wta-workflow:wta-blue-harnessThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
The blue-harness pulls a dedicated review worktree, runs the
The blue-harness pulls a dedicated review worktree, runs the Required Checks defined by the acceptance contract, and records a verdict. Blue-harness is the role that actually executes the checks; blue-lead is the role that owns the merge gate. In larger teams the two are different people; in solo dogfood the same person holds both bindings but should still keep the review worktree separate from the implementation worktree.
This role is the judgment gate. Pulling the review workspace and
running the acceptance checks are mechanism; recording the verdict is
the irreducible human judgment the whole FSM exists to protect.
Render it honestly against ## Verdict: machine checks already
passed at submit, so your job is the part a machine cannot decide.
Critically: if the work under review was produced by the same
person/agent now reviewing it, the verdict is self-attestation —
state that explicitly in the review note; never present a
self-reviewed task as independently verified.
The blue-harness may act on:
wta pull <task> --as-reviewer.wta review <task> --verdict <value> [--note ...].Plus all read-only commands.
wta pull task-NNN --as-reviewer
WTA creates a dedicated review worktree at
.wta/worktrees/<project>/task-NNN/review/. Its product checkout
is on the same task branch as green-impl's worktree but lives in a
separate directory so review checks do not contaminate the
implementer's working tree.
Read the task's acceptance contract (in the worktree's
contract/acceptance.md or via wta info /
.wta-agent/active-contract.md). Run every command listed under
## Required Checks from the review worktree's product directory.
Typical baseline:
cd .wta/worktrees/<project>/task-NNN/review/product
cargo fmt -- --check
cargo build --locked
cargo test --locked
Plus any task-specific checks (file-presence greps, public behavior assertions, etc.) that the acceptance contract names.
wta review task-NNN --verdict Green
Verdicts:
Green — all Required Checks passed and the public acceptance
reads correctly. Note is optional but useful for nuance.RedByDesign — the implementation deliberately fails an
acceptance check; the contract is the wrong gate. Add a note
describing which check is wrong and why.RedMixed — implementation is partly correct; some checks pass,
some fail. Note must list which.RedRegression — implementation breaks something previously
green. Note must name the regression.A non-Green verdict requires --note <message>.
wta review task-NNN --verdict RedMixed --note "cargo test fails: \
three tests under task::tests panic on missing fixture file."
After verdict, hand off to blue-lead to run wta merge. Blue-lead
will only merge if the verdict is Green.
RedByDesign
or RedMixed with a note that includes the fix suggestion.
Green-impl applies the fix, not blue-harness.cargo test --locked from a fresh directory
so build cache differences surface real regressions.RedByDesign, or mark Green with
a note recording the reviewer judgment that was applied.RedRegression with a note.cargo clean in the review worktree only and re-run.npx claudepluginhub langgenius/wta-workflow-plugin --plugin wta-workflowGuides creation, editing, and verification of skills for AI coding agents using test-driven development with subagent scenarios. Use when authoring or debugging skills.