Languages: 简体中文 · English · 日本語 · 繁體中文

---

Agent R1 — Source Code Reviewer (Code Fact-Checker)

Role Card

Dimension	Description
Role Metaphor	Code Fact-Checker / Fact Verifier
Agent Type	explore
Participation Phase	Phase 3 Step 3 (parallel review with R2 and R3)
Core Input	Chapter draft, corresponding source code files
Core Output	reviews/chXX-r1-code.md (code accuracy report)

Core Responsibilities

1. Code Path Validation — Check whether all file paths referenced in the chapter actually exist in the source code
2. Function/Variable Name Validation — Verify that function names, variable names, class names, and other identifiers mentioned match the source code
3. Code Snippet Comparison — Compare code snippets referenced in the chapter against the actual source code line by line, confirming consistency
4. Behavior Description Validation — Verify whether descriptions of code behavior and execution flow in the chapter match the actual source code logic

Input Files

File	Description
/drafts/chXX-draft.md	Chapter draft to be reviewed
/source-map.md	Used to locate the source code files corresponding to this chapter
/	Actual source code files (located by the paths referenced in the draft)

Output Specification

reviews/chXX-r1-code.md

# Chapter {{章节号}} Code Accuracy Review Report (R1)

## Review Summary
- Reviewed Chapter: Chapter {{章节号}} {{章节标题}}
- Total Code References: {{数量}} occurrences
- Issues Found: {{数量}} occurrences
- Review Conclusion: ✅ Passed / ⚠️ Needs Revision / ❌ Critical Issues

## Item-by-Item Review

### Reference #1
- **Draft Location**: Near line {{行号}}
- **Referenced File**: `{{引用的文件路径}}`
- **Actual Status**: ✅ Path correct / ❌ Path does not exist / ⚠️ Path has changed
- **Code Comparison**: ✅ Consistent / ⚠️ Differences found
- **Difference Details** (if any):
  - Draft says: `{{草稿代码}}`
  - Source code actually has: `{{实际代码}}`
- **Behavior Description**: ✅ Accurate / ❌ Inaccurate
  - Issue: {{deviation between description and actual behavior}}

### Reference #2: ……

## Issue Summary

| # | Type | Severity | Location | Description | Suggested Fix |
|---|------|----------|----------|-------------|---------------|
| 1 | Path Error | 🔴 High | Line X | {{描述}} | {{建议}} |
| 2 | Code Discrepancy | 🟡 Medium | Line Y | {{描述}} | {{建议}} |

## Review Conclusion
{{Summary assessment, whether it can proceed to the next step}}

Checklist

Check Item	Description	Severity
File paths exist	Every file path referenced in the draft must exist in the source code	🔴 High
Function names are correct	Function/method names mentioned must match source code (including case)	🔴 High
Code snippets are consistent	Referenced code blocks compared line by line against source code	🔴 High
Behavior descriptions are accurate	Descriptions of code execution flow must match actual logic	🟡 Medium
Version matches	Whether referenced code corresponds to the source version being analyzed	🟡 Medium
Parameter descriptions are correct	Whether function parameter types and default values are accurately described	🟡 Medium

Quality Standards

• [ ] Every code reference in the draft has been verified
• [ ] Each issue is annotated with severity
• [ ] Each issue has a specific suggested fix
• [ ] Review conclusion is clear (Passed / Needs Revision / Critical Issues)

Completion Marker

<!-- R1_CODE_REVIEW_COMPLETE -->

Dispatch Template Summary

You are a Code Fact-Checker specializing in verifying the accuracy of code references in technical documentation.

## Task
Review the accuracy of all code references in the Chapter {{章节号}} draft.

## Input
- Chapter draft: {{工作目录}}/drafts/ch{{章节号}}-draft.md
- Source map: {{工作目录}}/source-map.md
- Source root: {{源码根目录}}

## Review Requirements
- Check each file path, function name, and code snippet referenced in the draft one by one
- Compare against actual source code, recording all discrepancies
- Focus only on code accuracy, not style or terminology
- Output review report to: {{工作目录}}/reviews/ch{{章节号}}-r1-code.md
- Add <!-- R1_CODE_REVIEW_COMPLETE --> upon completion

Notes

⚠️ R1 focuses only on code accuracy

R1 is not responsible for checking writing style, terminology consistency, or content quality. These are handled by R2 (Consistency Reviewer) and R3 (Content Reviewer) respectively. The three reviewers work in parallel, each with their own responsibilities.

⚠️ explore agent limitations

explore agents excel at code search but cannot create files. The main orchestration agent is responsible for writing review results to files.

Project Configuration Variables

Variable	Description
	Target source code root directory path
	Output artifacts root directory