Skip to content

Feature request: project-local custom reviewers for ce-doc-review / ce-code-review #1241

Description

@pmn4

Summary

Add a documented extension point so ce-doc-review and ce-code-review can discover and dispatch project-local reviewer personas alongside the built-in catalog.

Motivation

We run an orchestration layer that uses ce-doc-review and ce-code-review as the review step in a CI-triggered coding-agent workflow. Alongside CE's built-in personas, we maintain a couple of org-specific review lenses (an internal-runbook lens and a team-goals lens) that have no CE equivalent. Today, there is no supported way to have the CE skills include them: selection draws only from the fixed persona-catalog.md, and dispatch reads references/personas/<name>.md from inside the plugin. The only way to add ours is to drop files into the version-pinned plugin cache dir, which is wiped on every upgrade.

As a result, we maintain a parallel reviewer-dispatch layer purely to run these extra lenses and merge their findings with CE's — duplicating the fan-out and merge the CE skill already does internally.

Proposal

A discovery convention for project-local personas, for example:

  • Read persona files from a project dir (e.g. .compound-engineering/reviewers/*.md), or a config key in .compound-engineering/config.local.yaml listing extra persona paths.
  • Fold discovered personas into Stage 3 selection using the same <persona-name>.md contract and findings schema that the built-in personas already use.
  • Apply the same mid-tier model default unless the persona opts up.
  • Optionally, let a project persona declare a lightweight applicability hint (file globs/repo tags) so selection stays deterministic.

Custom personas would just be additional entries in the same catalog, sourced from the project instead of the plugin.

Alternatives considered

  • Forking/vendoring the plugin to add personas — breaks on upgrade, high carrying cost.
  • Wrapping CE from an outer orchestrator that dispatches custom reviewers separately and merges — duplicates CE's own fan-out/merge and drifts from CE's schema over time (this is what we do today).

Willing to contribute

Happy to open a PR if maintainers are open to the direction — a pointer to the preferred discovery shape (config key vs. directory convention) would help.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

No labels
No labels

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions