Two refinements on top of assist review from earlier in the week. First, assist review now accepts an optional SHA argument and reviews sha^..sha instead of the current PR. When a SHA is passed there’s no PR lookup and no GitHub posting — output is just the local review folder. Useful for sanity-checking a single landed commit or a WIP before opening a PR. The PR and SHA paths share a runReviewPipeline but split context gathering (gatherShaContext vs the PR-based one) and request building so neither path has to special-case the other.

Second, I folded a much stronger set of reviewer guidelines into the prompt that goes to both Claude and Codex. The old prompt asked for findings with severity/impact/recommendation but didn’t say much about when something is worth flagging — so reviewers were raising pre-existing issues, vague tangles, and style nits dressed up as bugs. The new rubric is explicit: must be discrete and actionable, introduced by this change, not pre-existing, named to a concrete code path, and clearly not intentional. There’s also direct guidance on tone (matter-of-fact, no flattery, no padding) and an instruction to return zero findings when nothing clears the bar rather than padding to look thorough.

Smaller doc tweak: claude/CLAUDE.md now points Claude at the Atlassian MCP server for Jira context instead of describing assist jira shell calls.