# Review by Andrej Karpathy (Round 2)

Now I have a comprehensive picture of the implementation. Let me write my review.

---

## Review: `colonyos cleanup` — Andrej Karpathy Perspective

### Completeness Assessment

I've verified all 27 functional requirements against the implementation:

- **FR-1 through FR-10** (CLI structure, branch cleanup): ✅ All implemented. Command group with subcommands, merged branch listing, prefix filtering, `--all-branches`, `--execute` dry-run default, `--include-remote`, Rich tables, safety checks (current branch, default branch, open PRs), summary output.
- **FR-11 through FR-16** (artifact cleanup): ✅ All implemented. Stale artifact discovery, retention period, dry-run, `--retention-days`, RUNNING skip, summary with bytes.
- **FR-17 through FR-21** (structural scan): ✅ All implemented. Static analysis with configurable thresholds, Rich table, `--ai` flag with `cleanup_scan.md` template, report saved to `.colonyos/runs/`, `--refactor` delegation to `run_orchestrator`.
- **FR-22 through FR-23** (configuration): ✅ `CleanupConfig` dataclass with all fields, wired into `ColonyConfig`, CLI flags override config.
- **FR-24 through FR-27** (safety & audit): ✅ Audit logging to JSON, cleanup logs protected from self-deletion, AI scan inherits `base.md`, `cleanup_scan.md` forbids touching auth/security files.
- All tasks marked complete in the task file.

### Quality Assessment

**Tests**: 169 tests pass, 0 failures. Test coverage is thorough — branch safety (including fail-closed on GitHub API errors), artifact retention, file complexity scanning, refactor prompt synthesis, CLI integration for all subcommands.

**Code conventions**: Follows existing patterns well — `doctor.py`-style standalone module, Click command groups consistent with `queue`, Rich table formatting, lazy imports in CLI handlers. The `_parse_cleanup_config` follows the exact same validation pattern as `_parse_ci_fix_config`.

**No unnecessary deps**: Uses only stdlib + rich + existing colonyos modules. Good.

### Key Findings

1. **[src/colonyos/cleanup.py:174-175]**: The `removeprefix("* ")` call for parsing `git branch` output is correct and tested (line 201-216 has a specific test for star-marker mangling). Good catch vs. the common `lstrip("* ")` bug.

2. **[src/colonyos/cleanup.py:417-427]**: The regex-based function counting is explicitly documented as "approximate, best-effort heuristics." This is the right approach — don't over-engineer the static analysis when the `--ai` flag exists for qualitative depth. The fallback pattern for unknown extensions is sensible.

3. **[src/colonyos/cli.py, AI scan section]**: The AI scan composes `base.md + cleanup_scan.md` as the system prompt and feeds static scan results as context. This is good prompt engineering — the model gets structured input (the static findings) and structured output expectations (the markdown report format). The `allowed_tools` restriction to `["Read", "Glob", "Grep", "Agent"]` is correct — no `Edit` or `Write` tools, so the AI literally cannot modify files.

4. **[src/colonyos/cleanup.py:220-228]**: Fail-closed on GitHub API errors is the right safety default. If we can't verify PR status, we skip the branch. This is tested explicitly.

5. **[src/colonyos/cleanup.py:332-338]**: The artifact scanner correctly skips cleanup logs (`cleanup_*`) and state files (`loop_state_*`, `queue*`), preventing the cleanup command from eating its own audit trail (FR-25).

6. **[src/colonyos/instructions/cleanup_scan.md]**: The prompt is well-structured — clear constraints, specific analysis categories, a scoring rubric, and a defined output format. This is treating the prompt as a program, which is exactly right. The impact × risk scoring gives a natural prioritization axis.

7. **Minor**: The `--refactor` path calls `run_orchestrator` which goes through the full Plan/Implement/Review/Decision/Deliver pipeline. This satisfies the PRD's explicit requirement that code changes must go through review gates. No bypass.

8. **[src/colonyos/cleanup.py:267-270]**: In dry-run mode for branch deletion, branches are added to `deleted_local`/`deleted_remote` without actual deletion. This is semantically a bit misleading — they're "would-be-deleted" not "deleted." The CLI correctly labels them "would be deleted" so the UX is fine, but the data model naming could be clearer. Minor.

### Safety

- No secrets or credentials in code ✅
- All destructive operations require `--execute` ✅
- `git branch -d` (not `-D`) is used — won't force-delete unmerged branches ✅
- Error handling present for all subprocess calls and file operations ✅
- AI scan cannot modify files (restricted tool set) ✅

VERDICT: approve

FINDINGS:
- [src/colonyos/cleanup.py:267-270]: In dry-run mode, `deleted_local`/`deleted_remote` lists contain branches that were *not* actually deleted. The naming is slightly misleading at the data model level, though the CLI presentation is correct ("would be deleted"). Consider renaming to `candidates_local`/`candidates_remote` in a follow-up.
- [src/colonyos/cleanup.py:417-427]: Function-counting regexes are approximate heuristics — the Java pattern in particular will over-count (matching return types as definitions). Acceptable for v1 complexity triage; the `--ai` flag exists for deeper analysis.
- [src/colonyos/cli.py, AI scan]: The AI scan reuses `Phase.REVIEW` as the phase enum, which is semantically inaccurate (it's a scan, not a review). This works mechanically but may confuse audit logs. A future `Phase.SCAN` enum value would be cleaner.

SYNTHESIS:
This is a well-executed implementation that correctly separates deterministic operations (branch/artifact cleanup) from stochastic ones (AI scan), which is the single most important architectural decision. The dry-run-by-default pattern is enforced everywhere. The prompt engineering for the AI scan is solid — structured input, constrained output format, explicit tool restrictions that make it physically impossible for the model to modify files. The fail-closed safety pattern for GitHub API errors shows good defensive thinking. The code follows existing project conventions closely and adds no unnecessary dependencies. The test suite is comprehensive with 169 passing tests covering edge cases like git output parsing, permission errors, and GitHub API failures. Ship it.