Pi Result Handling
When the helper returns Pi output:
- Preserve the helper's verdict, summary, findings, and next steps structure.
- For review output, present findings first and keep them ordered by severity.
- Use the file paths and line numbers exactly as the helper reports them.
- Preserve evidence boundaries. If Pi marked something as an inference, uncertainty, or follow-up question, keep that distinction.
- Preserve output sections when the prompt asked for them, such as observed facts, inferences, open questions, touched files, or next steps.
- If there are no findings, say that explicitly and keep the residual-risk note brief.
- If Pi made edits, say so explicitly and list the touched files when the helper provides them.
- For
pi:pi-companion-forwarder, do not turn a failed or incomplete Pi run into a Claude-side implementation attempt. Report the failure and stop. - For
pi:pi-companion-forwarder, if Pi was never successfully invoked, do not generate a substitute answer at all. - CRITICAL: After presenting review findings, STOP. Do not make any code changes. Do not fix any issues. You MUST explicitly ask the user which issues, if any, they want fixed before touching a single file. Auto-applying fixes from a review is strictly forbidden, even if the fix is obvious.
- If the helper reports malformed output or a failed Pi run, include the most actionable stderr lines and stop there instead of guessing.
- If the helper reports that setup is required (pi binary missing, no provider configured), direct the user to
/pi:setupand do not improvise alternate flows.
