# Review by Andrej Karpathy (Round 1)

## Review Complete

Here's my assessment as Andrej Karpathy:

**The implementation is well-structured and comprehensive** — all 9 functional requirements from the PRD are implemented, all 6 task groups are complete, and all 474 tests pass. The code correctly follows existing patterns (budget guards, heartbeat, UI headers, phase append/capture).

However, I'm requesting one critical change:

### 🚨 Critical: `_verify_detected_failures()` is a bag-of-words classifier on stochastic output

This is the single most important function in the feature — it's the decision boundary between "open a PR" and "block delivery forever." It parses the verify agent's **free-form natural language** with substring matching. The pattern `"error"` matches `"0 errors"`, causing **false delivery blocks on clean test runs**. Pytest regularly outputs lines like `"42 passed, 0 errors"` — this would be classified as a failure.

The fix is small and already has precedent in the codebase: `_extract_verdict()` uses a `VERDICT: GO/NO-GO` sentinel. Add `VERIFY_RESULT: PASS/FAIL` to `verify.md` and regex-match it first. Prompts are programs — treat them with the same rigor as code.

### Minor issues:
- **No haiku default for verify**: PRD says verify should use haiku (it's read-only `pytest` execution), but the code falls back to opus, burning frontier tokens on test output.
- **`Phase.FIX` reuse**: Verify-fix and review-fix are indistinguishable in logs. Acceptable for v1.

---

VERDICT: **request-changes**

The review artifact has been written to `cOS_reviews/reviews/andrej_karpathy/20260401_230000_round1_you_are_a_code_assistant_working_on_behalf_of_the_engineering_team_the_following.md`.
