Incorporate external review feedback

Take review feedback on its own terms without defending, then confirm the loop actually closed, not just that something changed nearby.

Also usessuperpowers

No werkstoff fit — this is pure Superpowers. superpowers:receiving-code-review owns this task end to end: reading feedback without defensiveness, separating what must change from what is preference, and closing the loop. compass:compass-draft-revise is the nearest candidate but is scoped to prose, not code.

Start here

One prompt to start

Here's the review feedback -- work through it without arguing or defending, separate what actually has to change from what's just preference, score any prose docs against the reviewer's own criteria and fix only what falls below the bar, and then show me, comment by comment, the actual change that resolves each one rather than telling me it's addressed.

Needssuperpowers, compass

Beats

Run these in order. Each prompt is copy-pasteable straight into Claude Code.

1. superpowers:receiving-code-review

   The instinct to defend is strongest immediately; the skill exists to interrupt it.

   Run this beat on its own

   here's the review feedback. Work through it properly — separate what has to change from what's preference, and don't argue with the reviewer.

2. compass:compass-draft-revise

   Applies only when the artifact is prose; it rates 1-5 per criterion and revises only what falls at or below threshold.

   Run this beat on its own

   score this doc against the reviewer's criteria and fix only what falls below the bar

3. superpowers:verification-before-completionalso in 3 other recipes

   • Finish and integrate a development branch
   • Rehearse a release path that has never succeeded
   • Triage an incident under time pressure

   "Addressed the comments" and "the comment's concern is gone" are different claims.

   Run this beat on its own

   for each review comment, show me the change that resolves it — not just that something changed nearby

Worked example

Grounded in — why this beat order is trustworthy

applying a reviewer's finding to `docs/plugin-authoring/references/craft-standards.md` is the document case where `compass-draft-revise` genuinely applies; the same finding applied to a plugin's `SKILL.md` behavior is a code change and belongs in the review entry above.

Do / Don't

• ✓Work through review feedback without defending -- the instinct to defend is strongest immediately, which is exactly why it needs interrupting.
• ✓Separate what genuinely has to change from what's reviewer preference.
• ✓Score prose documents against the reviewer's own criteria and revise only what falls at or below the threshold.
• ✓Show the specific change that resolves each comment, not just that something changed nearby.

• ×Don't argue with the reviewer or defend the original choice before working through the feedback properly.
• ×Don't reach for compass-draft-revise on a code change -- it's scoped to prose, not code.
• ×Don't claim a review comment is addressed without showing the change that actually resolves its concern.