Setting the file. One moment.
Subchapter 2.10
reference/component-review.mdMarkdown8 KBView on GitHub
Use this checkpoint on comp-led builds once every raster region has its plate and the plates gate has scored them, before any page code exists. The approved comp is the reference. The user reviews two things: the plates that will ship, and the production plan for everything else, meaning which regions code draws. A painted region planned as code is the most expensive mistake a comp-led build makes, and this is where the user catches it. Text, controls and chrome are judged later, in the assembled first viewport.
Run "<skill-base-dir>/scripts/impeccable" component-review plan. It writes .impeccable/review/components.json from the measured spec, the comp and the plate files, and refuses, naming each one, while any raster region lacks its plate. Never write or edit that file for this stage: the packet is derived from the spec, so every change belongs in the regions file.
If the harness exposes component_review, call it with manifest_path set to .impeccable/review/components.json. The host captures, presents the review and returns the user’s decisions. A suspended request is waiting for the user; it is not a failed build or an approval.
Otherwise run "<skill-base-dir>/scripts/impeccable" component-review capture --manifest .impeccable/review/components.json, then start "<skill-base-dir>/scripts/impeccable" component-review serve --session <returned session> in the background. Open the URL it prints in the available browser and wait for the user; serve exits 0 once they submit. Read the decisions with "<skill-base-dir>/scripts/impeccable" component-review status --session <id>; "<skill-base-dir>/scripts/impeccable" component-review verify --manifest .impeccable/review/components.json confirms approval and refuses pending, needs-work and stale input. Never submit the page or write a receipt on the user’s behalf.
serve exits 2 when this session has no browser (the same signal as the decision page) and 4 when it closes after 30 idle minutes without a decision. Either way no one is reviewing: stop waiting, do not approve anything yourself, and do not build past this checkpoint. End the run and report the plan and asset review as pending with its session ID, so the user can resume it. A waiting review is pending work, not a completed build.
Apply the user’s decisions as given, never your own favorable verdict in their place.
plate, same box), the content as its own image region at the opening’s box, and each moving part (a shutter, a door) as its own plate. Name each layer after the original region, as <id>-frame, <id>-view or <id>-shutter-left, so the next round shows it as part of the user’s request. Rerun "<skill-base-dir>/scripts/impeccable" comp-spec --comp <comp.png> --regions <regions.json> and produce the plates."<skill-base-dir>/scripts/impeccable" comp-spec --comp <comp.png> --regions <regions.json>, and produce any new plates.kind to the one the user chose and rewrite its note to describe the material. Rerun "<skill-base-dir>/scripts/impeccable" comp-spec --comp <comp.png> --regions <regions.json>, then produce the new plates, with the asset producer when subagents are available."<skill-base-dir>/scripts/impeccable" comp-spec --comp <comp.png> --regions <regions.json>, and produce its plate if it is raster.Then run plan, capture and serve again. Unchanged decisions carry over, so the user sees only what changed. Any spec change, or a plate replaced after acceptance, needs a new round; the build-phase gate stays closed until the review of the current spec is accepted.
Build the first viewport from the approved plates and plan, and run the hero gate. Human review does not waive its integrity checks. After three failed hero attempts, or three failed responsive attempts before any first viewport is accepted, stop iterating and present the first-viewport review with the current build; the user’s eye settles what the readings could not.
Present a second manifest at .impeccable/review/hero.json. You write this one, and its shape is fixed:
{
"schemaVersion": 2,
"stage": "hero",
"id": "hero",
"title": "First viewport",
"comp": {"path": ".impeccable/mocks/comp.png", "width": 1536, "height": 1024},
"components": [{
"id": "first-viewport",
"name": "First viewport",
"medium": "HTML / CSS",
"note": "Assembled first viewport",
"box": {"x": 0, "y": 0, "w": 1, "h": 1},
"preview": {"kind": "page", "path": "index.html"},
"dependencies": ["styles.css", "assets/plates/sky.png", "fonts/display.woff2"]
}]
}schemaVersion is 2. Version 3 is the plan review packet and requires stage components. codeRegions and specSha256 exist only in version 3 and are refused here. reviewGroup is refused too: version 3 rejects it, and any other version accepts it only on a page preview in a components-stage manifest, never in a hero manifest.comp.path is the comp value in .impeccable/build/spec.json, and width and height are that PNG’s pixel size.box exactly {"x": 0, "y": 0, "w": 1, "h": 1} and name, medium and note as strings.preview.path is the page entry the build gates (artifact in .impeccable/build/state.json).dependencies lists every other file the page loads (stylesheets, scripts, plates, images, fonts) as bare strings. Every path, here and above, is project-relative and plain: no leading ./ or /, no .., no URL, no ?, #, %, : or backslash. A request to a file missing from this list, or to another host, fails the capture.The reference stays the approved comp. Call the same host review tool, or run capture, serve and verify with this manifest. Needs-work feedback starts another assembly round.
Acceptance closes human review for this build: never request plan, asset or assembly approval again. While the page renders what the user accepted, the hero score, the palette check and every numeric reading are advisories; material vetoes still hold (a missing or unreferenced plate, an SVG illustration, an organic clip, a clipped plate, invented ink, failed rendered presence). A text, control or chrome region the accepted screenshot also lacks is settled by the acceptance; a plate it lacks is a question for the user that the gate’s reason spells out: do not move off what they accepted on your own, but carry out their answer, including placing the plate. When the capture no longer matches the accepted screenshot, restore what the user accepted; until then the readings apply. Complete the rest of the page, responsive behavior, finish checks and documentation with the accepted first viewport as the visual direction. This is first-viewport calibration, not a claim that the user reviewed the rest of the page. Shared stylesheet edits do not reopen approval. Preserve the accepted direction; a later explicit user change is a new task.
Assembled-page capture executes inline and declared local scripts from the pinned inputs. Network APIs, frames and workers are unavailable; the initial viewport must settle before capture. Keep the real page and declare its scripts rather than removing behavior to pass review.