Pepe39/.claude/skills/step-05-label-severity

step-05-label-severity

What it does

Labels Axis 2 — Severity. Assesses how severe the issue is that the review comment points out.

Prerequisites

• Step 04 completed (Quality labeled)

Context

See docs/axis-2-severity.md for definitions, evaluation criteria, and examples. See docs/steps/step7.md for the step-by-step process. See DOCUMENTATION.md sections 8 (FAQ), 9 (Common Mistakes), and 10 (Tips) for edge cases and pitfalls.

Critical reminder: Severity measures the issue itself, NOT the quality or tone of the comment. These axes are independent.

Arguments

• id (required): Task ID

Instructions

1. Recover context

Read task_info.md — specifically the "Review Comment", "Comment Analysis", and the Quality label from step 04.

Update progress.md: step 05 status = "in-progress", Started = {timestamp ISO 8601}.

2. Identify the underlying issue

From the comment analysis, isolate the issue the comment is pointing out (regardless of whether the comment is correct about it):

• What problem does the comment claim exists?
• What would the real-world impact be if this issue is genuine?
• If the comment is Wrong (from step 04), still rate the severity of the issue as described — not the comment's correctness.

3. Apply severity criteria

| Question | If yes | |---|---| | Can this issue be safely ignored or deferred without risk? | nit | | Does it affect behavior but is unlikely to cause serious harm? | moderate | | Would a senior engineer insist on fixing this before merge? | critical |

Typical mappings:

• nit: style, naming, cosmetic, docs, minor code smell
• moderate: missing edge cases on uncommon paths, suboptimal but functional logic, missing null checks on rarely-hit paths
• critical: security vulnerabilities, data corruption, authentication bypass, race conditions, build-breaking errors, wrong results in core paths

4. Write reasoning

Document your reasoning in 2-3 sentences:

• What the underlying issue is
• Why you chose this severity level
• Consider: likelihood of occurrence + impact if it occurs

5. Common mistakes to avoid

• Do NOT let the comment's tone influence severity. "MUST FIX!" about a naming preference is still nit. An urgently worded comment about a style preference is still nit. A calmly worded comment about a SQL injection is still critical. (Mistake 2)
• Do NOT couple Quality and Severity. A Wrong comment about a security vulnerability is wrong + critical. A Helpful comment about a naming nit is helpful + nit. (Mistake 4)
• Rate by the most severe issue if the comment mentions multiple problems.
• Context matters for the same pattern. A missing null check in a rarely-used utility is moderate; the same check in a payment handler is critical.

6. Update task_info.md

Add to the Labels section:

### Severity
- **Label:** {nit | moderate | critical}
- **Reasoning:** {2-3 sentences explaining the decision}

7. Update progress

Update progress.md: step 05 status = "done", Completed = {timestamp ISO 8601}, Current Step = 06 - Label Context Scope.