Review

Code Review Before Commit

Review code quality, security, and maintainability before committing changes to Linus Dashboard.

Your Role

Senior code reviewer ensuring quality, security, and maintainability.

Context Required:

1. .aidriven/memorybank.md
2. .aidriven/rules/ - All rule files
3. Changed files (git diff)

Review Checklist

1. Code Quality

Readability:

• Functions < 50 lines
• Variables have descriptive names
• Complex logic has comments explaining WHY
• Code is self-documenting

Structure:

• Single responsibility per function/class
• No code duplication
• Logical organization
• Consistent style

Type Safety:

• All functions have type hints
• No Any without justification
• Return types specified
• Proper use of Optional/Union

2. Documentation

• Module docstrings present
• Public functions/classes documented
• Docstrings follow Google style
• Complex algorithms explained
• No outdated comments

3. Error Handling

• Specific exceptions (no bare except)
• Errors logged with context
• User-friendly error messages
• Resources cleaned up (try/finally)
• No silent failures

4. Async/Await

• No blocking I/O in async functions
• All async functions awaited
• asyncio.gather() for parallel ops
• Proper timeout handling
• CancelledError handled

5. Home Assistant Patterns

• Integration lifecycle correct (setup/unload)
• Data stored in hass.data[DOMAIN][entry_id]
• Cleanup registered with entry.async_on_unload()
• Entities have unique_id
• Services registered properly
• Coordinator pattern used correctly

6. Security

• No hardcoded credentials
• User input validated
• SQL injection prevented
• XSS vulnerabilities addressed
• API keys stored securely
• No sensitive data in logs

7. Performance

• No N+1 queries
• Expensive operations cached
• Database queries optimized
• No memory leaks
• Async for I/O operations

8. Testing

• Changes manually tested
• Edge cases considered
• Error paths tested
• No regressions

Review Process

Step 1: Get Changed Files

# See what changed
git status

# View diff
git diff

# Check specific files
git diff path/to/file.py

Step 2: Analyze Changes

For each changed file:

1. Read the diff
2. Understand the purpose
3. Check against standards
4. Look for issues
5. Note improvements

Step 3: Check Build and Tests

# TypeScript
npm run build
npm run type-check
npm run lint:check

# Run smoke tests
npm run test:smoke

Step 4: Provide Feedback

Format:

File: path/to/file.py

✅ Good:
- Clear function names
- Proper type hints
- Good error handling

⚠️ Issues:
1. Line 42: Missing docstring
2. Line 78: Blocking I/O in async function
3. Line 103: Exception too broad

💡 Suggestions:
- Consider caching this result
- Extract this logic to separate function

Common Issues to Watch For

Python Issues

Async/Await:

# ❌ Bad - blocking I/O
async def fetch_data():
    response = requests.get(url)  # Blocks event loop

# ✅ Good - async I/O
async def fetch_data():
    async with aiohttp.ClientSession() as session:
        async with session.get(url) as response:
            return await response.json()

Error Handling:

# ❌ Bad - bare except
try:
    do_something()
except:
    pass

# ✅ Good - specific exception
try:
    do_something()
except ValueError as err:
    _LOGGER.error("Invalid value: %s", err)
    raise

Type Hints:

# ❌ Bad - no types
def process_data(data):
    return data.get("value")

# ✅ Good - with types
def process_data(data: dict[str, Any]) -> str | None:
    """Process data and return value."""
    return data.get("value")

TypeScript Issues

Type Safety:

// ❌ Bad - any type
function process(data: any): any {
    return data.value;
}

// ✅ Good - proper types
function process(data: DataType): string | undefined {
    return data.value;
}

Null Safety:

// ❌ Bad - no null check
const value = entity.state.toUpperCase();

// ✅ Good - null check
const value = entity.state?.toUpperCase() ?? "unknown";

Security Review Checklist

• No secrets in code
• API keys from config
• User input sanitized
• SQL queries parameterized
• HTML output escaped
• HTTPS for external calls
• Authentication checked
• Authorization verified

Performance Review Checklist

• No synchronous I/O in async code
• Database queries optimized
• Caching used appropriately
• No unnecessary API calls
• Efficient algorithms
• Memory usage reasonable

Final Review

Before approving:

Code Quality:

• Follows project standards
• Well-documented
• Properly typed
• Good error handling

Functionality:

• Implements requirements
• No obvious bugs
• Edge cases handled
• Tested manually

Maintainability:

• Easy to understand
• Well-structured
• Follows patterns
• Documented properly

Security:

• No vulnerabilities
• Input validated
• Secrets protected

Review Outcome

APPROVE - Code meets all standards REQUEST CHANGES - Issues must be fixed COMMENT - Suggestions for improvement

Quick Commands

# Check what changed
git diff

# Check specific file
git diff path/to/file

# See commit history
git log --oneline -10

# Run quality checks
npm run lint:check
npm run type-check
npm run build

# Run tests
npm run test:smoke