feat(persona): add role-based review personas

Add persona system for specialized review roles. Each persona defines:
- A specific review focus (security, architecture, documentation)
- Custom system prompt additions
- Personality/tone adjustments

Built-in personas: security, architect, docs
Custom personas: load from JSON via persona-file flag

Includes workspace validation to prevent path traversal attacks.

Closes #51

review/prompt.go

@@ -7,6 +7,28 @@ import (
 	"strings"
 )
 
+// outputSchemaJSON is the shared JSON output format specification used by both
+// the generic reviewer and persona-based reviewers.
+const outputSchemaJSON = `{
+  "verdict": "APPROVE" or "REQUEST_CHANGES",
+  "summary": "Brief overall assessment (1-3 sentences)",
+  "findings": [
+    {
+      "severity": "MAJOR" or "MINOR" or "NIT",
+      "file": "path/to/file",
+      "line": <line number from the diff>,
+      "finding": "Description of the issue"
+    }
+  ],
+  "recommendation": "Full recommendation text explaining your verdict"
+}`
+
+// verdictRules is the shared verdict determination rules.
+const verdictRules = `Rules:
+- If there are any MAJOR findings → verdict must be REQUEST_CHANGES
+- If there are no MAJOR findings → verdict should be APPROVE
+- If CI has failed → verdict must be REQUEST_CHANGES with a finding noting the CI failure`
+
 // BuildSystemBase returns the core system prompt instructions without
 // patterns or conventions. Used by the budget package to separate
 // trimmable from non-trimmable content.
@@ -23,24 +45,10 @@ func BuildSystemBase() string {
 	sb.WriteString("2. Consider the CI status — if CI has failed, that is an automatic REQUEST_CHANGES regardless of code quality.\n")
 	sb.WriteString("3. Output your review as structured JSON (and ONLY JSON, no markdown fences or other text).\n\n")
 	sb.WriteString("Output format:\n")
-	sb.WriteString("{\n")
-	sb.WriteString("  \"verdict\": \"APPROVE\" or \"REQUEST_CHANGES\",\n")
-	sb.WriteString("  \"summary\": \"Brief overall assessment (1-3 sentences)\",\n")
-	sb.WriteString("  \"findings\": [\n")
-	sb.WriteString("    {\n")
-	sb.WriteString("      \"severity\": \"MAJOR\" or \"MINOR\" or \"NIT\",\n")
-	sb.WriteString("      \"file\": \"path/to/file\",\n")
-	sb.WriteString("      \"line\": <line number from the diff>,\n")
-	sb.WriteString("      \"finding\": \"Description of the issue\"\n")
-	sb.WriteString("    }\n")
-	sb.WriteString("  ],\n")
-	sb.WriteString("  \"recommendation\": \"Full recommendation text explaining your verdict\"\n")
-	sb.WriteString("}\n\n")
-	sb.WriteString("Rules:\n")
-	sb.WriteString("- If there are any MAJOR findings → verdict must be REQUEST_CHANGES\n")
-	sb.WriteString("- If there are no MAJOR findings → verdict should be APPROVE\n")
-	sb.WriteString("- If CI has failed → verdict must be REQUEST_CHANGES with a finding noting the CI failure\n")
-	sb.WriteString("- Be thorough but fair. Don't nitpick style unless it impacts readability significantly.\n")
+	sb.WriteString(outputSchemaJSON)
+	sb.WriteString("\n\n")
+	sb.WriteString(verdictRules)
+	sb.WriteString("\n- Be thorough but fair. Don't nitpick style unless it impacts readability significantly.\n")
 	sb.WriteString("- Line numbers should reference the new file line numbers from the diff headers.\n")
 	sb.WriteString("- If the diff is empty or trivial (only formatting/whitespace), APPROVE with no findings.\n")