---
name: review-severity-tiers
description: The authoritative severity-tier map for aggregating reviewer verdicts — gate types by reviewer, the Blocking/Major/Minor tiers with the auto-fix boundary, the no-consult rule, and the 5-round terminal cap. Load when aggregating review findings, deciding a pipeline gate, or sorting a finding into a severity tier.
user-invocable: false
---

# Review Severity Tiers

## Gate Types by Reviewer

| Reviewer | Gate Type | Blocks Ship? |
|----------|-----------|--------------|
| `security-reviewer` | HARD | Yes — critical or high findings are non-negotiable |
| `verifier` | HARD | Yes — tests must pass, build must succeed |
| `code-reviewer` | HARD | Yes — blocking issues must be resolved |
| `ux-reviewer` | AUTO-FIX | REQUEST CHANGES is auto-applied in the loop (a *major*). Only COMMENT notes may reach you |
| `technical-writer` | ADVISORY | No — findings recorded, pipeline proceeds |

## Severity Tiers and the Auto-Fix Boundary

There is no single "blocker/critical/major/minor" scale — reviewers raise
findings in three different vocabularies (Conventional Comments
`issue`/`suggestion`/`nitpick`, security CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW, and the
APPROVE/REQUEST CHANGES/COMMENT verdict). This table is the authoritative map
from any of those onto the action the orchestrator takes. Every finding lands
in exactly one tier.

| Tier | Findings in this tier | Action |
|------|-----------------------|--------|
| **Blocking** | `issue (blocking)`, code-reviewer REQUEST CHANGES, security CRITICAL/HIGH, any verifier failure | Auto-fixed in the loop. **Never** surfaced to the user. |
| **Major** | `suggestion (non-blocking)`, security MEDIUM, ux-reviewer REQUEST CHANGES | Auto-fixed in the loop. **Never** surfaced to the user. |
| **Minor and below** | `nitpick (non-blocking)`, security LOW, technical-writer GAPS, any COMMENT-level note | Recorded in the PR body's `## Review notes` — never presented mid-run. |

**The no-consult rule (non-negotiable).** Findings are never presented to the
user mid-run. Blocking and Major findings loop the implementer automatically
until they are zero. Minor-and-below findings defer to the PR body's
`## Review notes` (tagged by source reviewer) for the human's PR review. A
mid-run prompt that lists any finding is a defect.

## Aggregating Verdicts

When multiple reviewers produce verdicts, aggregate them into a single
pipeline gate decision:

1. If ANY Blocking or Major finding exists -> pipeline gate FAILS — loop back
   to IMPLEMENT automatically, with no consult.
2. If only Minor-and-below findings remain -> pipeline gate PASSES with
   notes: record them for the PR body's `## Review notes` and proceed to
   SHIP.
3. If no findings remain -> pipeline gate PASSES (proceed to SHIP).

The loop continues until Blocking and Major are zero, capped at 5 rounds. At
the cap, halt with the full unresolved-findings summary — terminal, no PR.

Blocking and Major failures are never aggregated away and never surfaced for
triage. A single CRITICAL security finding blocks shipping regardless of how
many other reviewers approved.