LoopyLuci Code Review
Two-axis review of the diff between HEAD and a fixed point the user supplies:
- Standards - does the code conform to this repo's documented coding standards?
- Spec - does the code faithfully implement the originating issue / PRD / spec?
Process
1. Pin the fixed point
Whatever the user said as the fixed point - a commit SHA, branch name, tag, main, HEAD~5, etc. Capture the diff command: git diff <fixed-point>...HEAD. Also note the list of commits.
2. Identify the spec source
Look for the originating spec: issue references in commit messages, a spec file under docs/ or specs/, or a PRD.
3. Run parallel reviews
Spawn sub-agents for the Standards review and Spec review simultaneously. Aggregate findings side by side.
Common Pitfalls
- Fixed point not resolving: Always verify the fixed point resolves with git rev-parse before spawning sub-agents. A bad ref wastes both agents' contexts.
- Empty diff not caught early: Check diff is non-empty before starting reviews. An empty diff should fail here, not inside two parallel sub-agents.
- Spec source not found: If no spec/issue can be found for the changes, the spec review axis has nothing to compare against. Report this clearly.
Code Examples
# Step 1: Pin the fixed point
git rev-parse main
git diff main...HEAD --stat
git log main..HEAD --oneline
# Step 2: Find spec source
# Look in commit messages for issue references (#123)
# Check docs/, specs/, .scratch/ for matching spec files
# Step 3: Run parallel reviews
# Standards review: does code follow this repo's conventions?
# Spec review: does code implement the originating issue?
Verification Checklist
- Fixed point confirmed (git rev-parse succeeds)
- Diff is non-empty
- Spec source identified or reported missing
- Standards review completed
- Spec review completed
- Findings aggregated and reported side by side