Foreman v1.3.0
Project review
Asking an agent "what's wrong with this codebase?" gives you one pass, one opinion, and a wall of prose you have to re-read to find the part that mattered. Foreman now has a Review tab that runs the question properly: pick a repo and up to five lenses — dependency health, test presence, architecture, security and dead code — and each one runs as its own agent lane, in parallel, against the real repo. What comes back is a report rather than a transcript: a headline verdict per lens, a handful of metrics, a chart, and findings ranked by severity that you can filter and open one at a time. The lenses were written to work on any language, not just the TypeScript they were built against, so a Go or Python repo gets the same five questions asked of it.
Numbers that say where they came from
The failure mode of an AI audit isn't being wrong, it's being confidently approximate — a "47 untested modules" that was eyeballed off a file listing reads exactly like one that was counted. Every metric in a review is now stamped as measured or estimated, and a measured number has to carry the command that produced it; anything claiming to be measured without that evidence gets demoted to an estimate before you ever see it. The same rule applies to the lens that leans on an external analyzer: the report tells you which one ran, so you know whether two reports are even comparable. Per-lens cost and duration estimates in the picker come from your own last run of that lens rather than a number shipped in the build, which stops being true the moment you change model.
From a finding to a fix
A finding you agree with is still work you have to describe to somebody. Each one now expands to its evidence and suggested fix with two buttons under it: Copy as prompt, and Start session to fix, which opens a session in the reviewed project with the finding already written as its first turn. The report header keeps Re-run, so re-checking after a round of fixes is one click with the same lenses and the same scope.
Reviews you can send to somebody else
A report that only exists inside the app is hard to act on with anyone who isn't sitting at it. Export writes the whole review — verdicts, metrics, charts, every finding and its evidence — as a single self-contained HTML file with no scripts and nothing to fetch, so it opens in any browser, attaches to a mail or a ticket, and reads the same in a year. Past runs are kept and listed newest-first, each labelled with the project it ran against, and a run interrupted by quitting the app is now reconciled on the next start instead of sitting on screen pretending to still be running.
Reviews that don't crowd out your sessions
Five agent lanes starting at once is a real burst of processes, and the honest risk was that starting a review would make the rest of the app feel stuck. Lanes are throttled by their own limit, deliberately set below the app's session-launch cap, so a review can never be wider than the burst Foreman would allow anyway and can never queue behind your own session starts. Each lens gets only the read-only commands it needs — counting and searching, never writing — and the dead-code lens, the one lens that fetches and runs an ecosystem analyzer, says so on its card before you pick it. Project review is part of Pro, alongside fan-out.
macOS, Apple Silicon. Signed with a Developer ID certificate and notarized by Apple — opens normally with no Gatekeeper warning, and in-app silent auto-update is enabled.