avav25 Code Review
Systematic code review skill with layered checklists. Produces consistent, actionable feedback across all review types.
When to Use
- Reviewing pull requests or merge requests
- Conducting architecture reviews
- Auditing code for security, performance, or quality
- Pre-merge quality gates
When NOT to Use
- Writing new code (use
/feature-devor/bugfixinstead) - Validating AI asset files (use
asset-validationskill) - Running automated checks before commit (use
/pre-commit)
Review Process
0. Gather Context
Read AGENTS.md at the project root to identify:
- Tech stack (determines which language-specific patterns to check)
- Code conventions (naming, structure, formatting rules)
- Architecture patterns in use (helps evaluate structural decisions)
1. Understand the Change
Before reviewing code, answer:
- What is being changed? (feature, bugfix, refactor, dependency update)
- Why is it being changed? (linked issue, PRD, bug report)
- Scope: How many files, which modules, what's the blast radius?
2. Apply Checklists
Use the appropriate checklist(s) based on change type:
| Change Type | Checklists to Apply |
|---|---|
| New feature | review-checklist.md + security-checklist.md |
| Bug fix | review-checklist.md (focus: root cause, regression test) |
| Refactor | review-checklist.md (focus: behavior preservation, tests) |
| API change | review-checklist.md + security-checklist.md |
| Infrastructure | security-checklist.md |
| Dependencies | security-checklist.md (focus: supply chain) |
3. Provide Feedback
Structure review comments as:
## Review Summary
**Verdict**: APPROVE | REQUEST_CHANGES | COMMENT
### Critical (must fix before merge)
- [ ] [file:line] Description — why it matters
### Suggestions (should fix, not blocking)
- [ ] [file:line] Description — improvement rationale
### Nits (optional, style/preferences)
- [ ] [file:line] Description
Rules:
- Every critical finding must explain why it's a problem and how to fix it
- Link to relevant documentation or standards when applicable
- Acknowledge good patterns — reinforce what works well
- Never approve code with known critical issues
- Flag missing tests for new logic paths
Integration
- Follows rules:
Agent(software-engineer)(architecture, code quality) - Used by workflows:
/code-review,/create-pr - Companion checklists:
review-checklist.md,security-checklist.md