113 lines
2.8 KiB
Markdown
113 lines
2.8 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: requesting-code-review
|
|
description: Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Requesting Code Review
|
|
|
|
Dispatch a code review subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history.
|
|
|
|
**Core principle:** Review early, review often.
|
|
|
|
## When to Request Review
|
|
|
|
**Mandatory:**
|
|
- After each task in subagent-driven development
|
|
- After completing major feature
|
|
- Before merge to main
|
|
|
|
**Optional but valuable:**
|
|
- When stuck (fresh perspective)
|
|
- Before refactoring (baseline check)
|
|
- After fixing complex bug
|
|
|
|
## How to Request
|
|
|
|
**1. Get git SHAs:**
|
|
```bash
|
|
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)
|
|
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent** with these inputs:
|
|
- **WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED** — What you just built
|
|
- **PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS** — What it should do (link to plan or task text)
|
|
- **BASE_SHA** — Starting commit
|
|
- **HEAD_SHA** — Ending commit
|
|
- **DESCRIPTION** — Brief summary
|
|
|
|
**3. Act on feedback:**
|
|
- Fix Critical issues immediately
|
|
- Fix Important issues before proceeding
|
|
- Note Minor issues for later
|
|
- Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)
|
|
|
|
## Code Reviewer Subagent Prompt Template
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Review the code changes for quality and correctness.
|
|
|
|
## What was implemented
|
|
{WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED}
|
|
|
|
## Requirements / Plan
|
|
{PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS}
|
|
|
|
## Git diff
|
|
BASE_SHA: {BASE_SHA}
|
|
HEAD_SHA: {HEAD_SHA}
|
|
|
|
Review for:
|
|
1. Does the code meet the stated requirements?
|
|
2. Are there bugs, edge cases, or logic errors?
|
|
3. Is error handling adequate?
|
|
4. Is the code clear and maintainable?
|
|
5. Are there performance concerns?
|
|
6. Does it follow project conventions (React 18, Tailwind, Vitest)?
|
|
|
|
Report:
|
|
- Strengths
|
|
- Issues by severity (Critical / Important / Minor)
|
|
- Overall assessment: Ready to proceed, or needs fixes
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Example
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]
|
|
You: Let me request code review before proceeding.
|
|
|
|
BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
|
|
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
|
|
|
|
[Dispatch code-reviewer subagent]
|
|
|
|
[Subagent returns]:
|
|
Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
|
|
Issues: Important: Missing progress indicators
|
|
Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
|
|
Assessment: Ready to proceed
|
|
|
|
You: [Fix progress indicators]
|
|
[Continue to Task 3]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Red Flags
|
|
|
|
**Never:**
|
|
- Skip review because "it's simple"
|
|
- Ignore Critical issues
|
|
- Proceed with unfixed Important issues
|
|
- Argue with valid technical feedback
|
|
|
|
**If reviewer wrong:**
|
|
- Push back with technical reasoning
|
|
- Show code/tests that prove it works
|
|
- Request clarification
|
|
|
|
## Integration
|
|
|
|
**Used by:**
|
|
- **subagent-driven-development** — After each task
|
|
- **executing-plans** — After each batch
|