Bc Al Code Reviewer

BC AL Code Reviewer

Audits Business Central AL extension code against a prioritized convention stack and produces a structured review report. The compiler catches syntax errors — this skill catches the mistakes that compile fine but cause problems in production, AppSource rejection, or SaaS environments.

Read references/convention-stack.md while running Categories 1–4 — it contains the complete rule set with AL code examples and source references for every check. Read references/appsource-blockers.md when running Category 5 or when the user asks about AppSource readiness — it contains the 14 blockers with Microsoft documentation links and a pre-submission checklist.

Convention priority stack

Rules are applied in this priority order. When sources conflict, the higher priority wins:

When a finding comes from Priority 1 or 2, it is always 🔴 Blocker regardless of how minor it looks.

Input

The user provides one or more of:

• AL code — one or more .al files (table, page, codeunit, report, etc.)
• Scope — what to focus on: full review, AppSource readiness only, performance only, SaaS readiness only
• Context — is this for AppSource, a per-tenant extension, or an internal tool?
• Extension type — new extension or modification of an existing one

If no scope is specified, run a full review across all five categories. If the user provides only a snippet (not a full object), note which checks cannot be run without the full object.

Review categories

Category 1 — Naming & Structure

Checks that objects, files, fields, and variables follow AL naming conventions.

Key rules — see references/convention-stack.md#naming for the complete list:

• All custom objects have a prefix or suffix (mandatory for AppSource)
• File naming matches object type (MyCodeunit.Codeunit.al, not Codeunit50100.al)
• Object IDs within the declared app.json idRanges
• No WITH statements (NoImplicitWith feature required from runtime 11.0+)
• Labels use Locked = true when translation is not intended
• ObsoleteState always paired with ObsoleteReason and ObsoleteTag
• Procedures use PascalCase, local variables use camelCase
• No hardcoded company names, environment names, or user IDs in code

Category 2 — Performance Anti-Patterns

Checks for patterns that compile correctly but cause slow pages, timeouts, or database overload.

Key rules — see references/convention-stack.md#performance:

• SetLoadFields present before every FindSet / FindFirst / Get that reads specific fields
• No CalcFields inside repeat...until loops
• No database calls (Get, FindSet, FindFirst) inside repeat...until loops over large tables
• No CalcSums replaceable loops (manual sum accumulation)
• Maximum 4 FlowFields on List pages
• No Commit inside loops
• SetRange / SetFilter applied before Find* (never after)

Category 3 — Extensibility Contract

Checks that the code respects the BC event-driven extensibility model so other extensions can integrate safely.

Key rules — see references/convention-stack.md#extensibility:

• Every business procedure has an OnBefore + OnAfter [IntegrationEvent] pair
• OnBefore events always include var IsHandled: Boolean parameter
• IsHandled is checked after raising the event (if IsHandled then exit)
• No Commit inside event subscribers
• Event subscriber parameters match publisher signature exactly (verified, not assumed)
• [IntegrationEvent(false, false)] used (not GlobalVarAccess = true unless justified)
• Publishers do not expose internal implementation details through event parameters
• [BusinessEvent] used for optional integrations, [IntegrationEvent] for critical ones

Category 4 — SaaS Readiness

Checks for patterns that work on-prem but fail or are rejected in SaaS / Business Central online.

Key rules — see references/convention-stack.md#saas:

• InherentPermissions declared on all codeunits (InherentPermissions = X minimum)
• InherentEntitlements declared on all objects
• No DataPerCompany = false without explicit justification in a comment
• No direct file system access (File, Blob local paths)
• No Shell or OS-level calls
• No hardcoded absolute paths
• [NonDebuggable] on procedures handling secrets or credentials
• Secrets stored in IsolatedStorage, never in table fields as plain text
• No sleep or artificial delays
• ExecutionContext guard on event subscribers that call external services
• No SMTP direct — use Email module instead

Category 5 — AppSource Blockers

Checks specifically for the conditions that cause AppSource validation to reject a submission. See references/appsource-blockers.md for the complete list with references.

Key checks:

• Prefix/suffix registered and applied consistently to all objects and fields
• No access to base app internal procedures (those not marked [Obsolete] but not public)
• application dependency version compatible with target BC release
• logo and brief present in app.json
• No suppressWarnings pragma hiding CodeCop errors
• No #pragma warning disable without a specific rule number and justification comment
• TranslationFile feature enabled if the extension supports multiple languages
• No ObsoleteState = Removed objects still referenced in code
• Test coverage present (test app as separate project)

Execution workflow

Step 1 — Identify object types and scope

List every object type present in the provided code. Note which categories apply:

Step 2 — Run each applicable category

For each category, list every rule violation found. Do not skip a rule because it seems minor — the severity classification handles prioritization.

Step 3 — Classify findings

Step 4 — Generate review report

Use the exact template below.

Step 5 — Generate prioritized fix list

After the report, produce a numbered fix list ordered by: 🔴 first (by AppSource impact), then 🟡, then 🔵. Each item has the exact line or object to fix and the corrected version.

Report template

# AL Code Review Report

**Extension:** {extension name from app.json or "unnamed"}
**Date:** {today}
**Scope:** Full review / AppSource readiness / Performance / SaaS readiness
**Objects reviewed:** {list of object types and counts}

---

## Summary

| Category | 🔴 Blockers | 🟡 Warnings | 🔵 Suggestions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 — Naming & Structure | n | n | n |
| 2 — Performance | n | n | n |
| 3 — Extensibility | n | n | n |
| 4 — SaaS Readiness | n | n | n |
| 5 — AppSource Blockers | n | n | n |
| **Total** | **n** | **n** | **n** |

**AppSource ready:** Yes / No / Conditional (fix blockers first)

---

## Findings

### 🔴 Blockers — {count}

#### [B-01] {Short title}
- **Category:** {1–5}
- **Source:** AppSource / CodeCop / alguidelines.dev / al-copilot-skills
- **Location:** {Object name, line or section}
- **Rule:** {Rule reference or description}
- **Issue:** {What is wrong and why it matters}
- **Fix:** {Exact corrected code or instruction}

{Repeat for each blocker}

---

### 🟡 Warnings — {count}

#### [W-01] {Short title}
- **Category:** {1–5}
- **Source:** {source}
- **Location:** {location}
- **Issue:** {issue}
- **Fix:** {fix}

---

### 🔵 Suggestions — {count}

| ID | Category | Location | Issue | Suggestion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S-01 | {cat} | {loc} | {issue} | {suggestion} |

---

## Prioritized fix list

1. 🔴 [B-01] {one-line fix description} → {object/line}
2. 🔴 [B-02] ...
3. 🟡 [W-01] ...
4. 🔵 [S-01] ...

---

## Convention sources

- AppSource requirements: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/business-central/dev-itpro/developer/devenv-checklist-submission
- CodeCop rules: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/business-central/dev-itpro/developer/analyzers/codecop
- alguidelines.dev: https://alguidelines.dev
- al-copilot-skills catalogue: https://github.com/microsoft/al-copilot-skills

---

## Skills Evidencing

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Skill loaded | bc-al-code-reviewer |
| Objects reviewed | {list} |
| Convention stack applied | AppSource → CodeCop → alguidelines.dev → al-copilot-skills |
| Findings | 🔴 {n} / 🟡 {n} / 🔵 {n} |
| AppSource ready | Yes / No / Conditional |

Behaviour rules

1. Never invent rules. Every finding must reference a specific rule from the convention stack. If you are unsure, mark the finding as 🔵 Suggestion and cite the closest applicable source.

2. If the user provides a snippet without full object context, note explicitly which checks could not be run (e.g., cannot verify InherentPermissions without the full codeunit declaration).

3. Do not rewrite the entire code. The fix for each finding is targeted and minimal.

4. If the extension context is "internal tool" (not AppSource, not SaaS), downgrade Category 4 and 5 findings from Blocker to Warning where appropriate — and state this explicitly in the report header.

5. If no issues are found in a category, say so explicitly — do not omit the category from the report.

Reference files

• references/convention-stack.md — Complete rule set for all five categories with source references
• references/appsource-blockers.md — AppSource validation requirements with Microsoft documentation links