Skip to content

vt-v-review

Content-level review of VMS vault files. Goes beyond schema validation to check factual accuracy of norm references, consistency of reifegrad assessments, appropriateness of VisiTrans-specific content, and German language quality. Produces per-file review findings: approve, revise, or escalate-to-human.

Plugin: vms
Category: Other
Command: /vt-v-review

VMS Content Review

This skill performs content-level review of VMS vault files — checking accuracy, consistency, and appropriateness beyond what automated schema validation covers.

Process

  1. Read references/review-checklist.md for domain-specific review criteria
  2. Read references/norm-accuracy-guide.md for common mistakes
  3. Read target files specified by the argument
  4. Review each file against the checklist:
  5. Factual accuracy of norm references
  6. Reifegrad assessment plausibility
  7. VisiTrans-specific content appropriateness
  8. Cross-reference correctness
  9. German language quality
  10. Classify each file: approve / revise / escalate-to-human
  11. Report findings with specific issues and recommendations

Review Criteria

Norm Reference Accuracy

  • ISO 27001 control numbers match actual Annex A structure
  • VDA ISA references use correct chapter numbering
  • NIS2 article references are accurate
  • ISO 9001 chapter numbers match actual standard structure
  • DSGVO article references are correct

Reifegrad Plausibility

  • Does the claimed reifegrad match the described implementation?
  • Is a reifegrad of 3+ justified for a 15-person company?
  • Are there Nachweise to support the claimed level?
  • Is the Beschreibung der Umsetzung consistent with the reifegrad?

VisiTrans Specificity

  • Does the content reference actual VisiTrans systems and tools?
  • Are supplier references accurate (from the supplier directory)?
  • Is the scope appropriate for a SaaS company?
  • Are generic boilerplate statements replaced with specific details?

Cross-Reference Consistency

  • Do wiki-links point to the correct documents?
  • Are norm_refs consistent between related files?
  • Do TOM measures align with ISMS controls they reference?

Impact Analysis & Cascade Awareness

Run the impact analyzer on the file under review: 

python3 impact_analyzer.py "<vault_path>" "<target_file>"
Resolve the script path relative to TOOLKIT_ROOT.

For each referencing file: - Read its review_date from YAML frontmatter - Compare against the reviewed file's last git modification date (git log -1 --format=%ai -- "<target_file>") - If a referencing file's review_date is older than the reviewed file's last modification: flag as "stale review_date — may need consistency check"

Report: - "N Dateien referenzieren diese Datei. Davon haben M ein aelteres review_date als die letzte Aenderung." - List the M files with their review_date and the reviewed file's modification date - This is informational — include in the review findings as advisory

Language Quality

  • Professional German business language
  • No English mixed in (except technical terms)
  • Consistent terminology across files
  • No placeholder text or template markers remaining

Classification

Rating Meaning Action
approve Content is accurate, complete, and appropriate Ready for commit
revise Minor issues found, can be fixed automatically Agent can fix
escalate-to-human Requires human judgment (reifegrad, legal claims, VisiTrans specifics) Flag for user review

Output Format

## Review Results — YYYY-MM-DD

### Summary
| Rating | Count |
|--------|-------|
| Approve | N |
| Revise | N |
| Escalate | N |

### File Details

#### [filename.md] — APPROVE
No issues found.

#### [filename.md] — REVISE
- [ ] Issue: [description]
- [ ] Fix: [recommendation]

#### [filename.md] — ESCALATE
- Reason: [why human judgment needed]
- Question: [specific question for the user]

Open Brain Capture (Optional)

After completing the review, if the capture_thought MCP tool is available, capture the review outcome.

How: 1. Check if capture_thought tool is available. If not: skip silently. 2. Call capture_thought with: 

thought: "VMS review {date}: {N} files reviewed. Approved: {N}. Revise: {N}. Escalated: {N}. Key finding: {most significant issue}. Management system: {ISMS/DSMS/QMS}."
3. On timeout or error: log debug message and continue. Never fail the skill.