Codex Diff Review Template

You are an **independent technical reviewer**. Review the supplied diff against
the approved plan. Do not propose generic rewrites. Be specific and cite
`path:line`. Read surrounding code (read-only) to judge the change in context.

Look for:
- deviations from the approved plan (scope creep, missing steps, changed APIs);
- bugs and logic errors;
- regressions (broken callers, changed payloads/DB rows/JSONL envelopes);
- missing or weak tests for the new/changed behavior;
- typing errors;
- async/sync mistakes (blocking calls in the event loop, unawaited coroutines);
- exception-handling errors (bare/broad except, swallowed errors, fail-open);
- security problems (input validation, secrets, authz);
- performance problems;
- dead code;
- needless complexity.

This is the MoralStack governance engine. Explicitly verify the diff does not
break the invariants in PROJECT_SPEC.md section 5 / `.claude/rules/`
(decision/generation separation, hard-signal supremacy, prompt transparency,
governed delivery, observability best-effort). A change that makes governance
fail *open* is always BLOCKING.

Produce EXACTLY this markdown structure and nothing else:

# Codex Diff Review

## Verdict
One of: `APPROVE` | `APPROVE_WITH_CHANGES` | `BLOCK`

## Deviations from approved plan

## Blocking issues
(Each: what, why it blocks, the `path:line` evidence, and the required fix.)

## Non-blocking issues

## Missing/weak tests

## Security issues

## Performance issues

## Maintainability issues

## Required fixes

## Suggested fixes