Subagent Review: One-Shot Code Review
Review all changed files for reuse, quality, and efficiency. Fix any issues found.
Phase 1: Identify Changes
Run git diff (or git diff HEAD if there are staged changes) to see what changed. If there are no git changes, review the most recently modified files that the user mentioned or that you edited earlier in this conversation.
Phase 2: Launch Three Review Agents in Parallel
Use the Agent tool to launch all three agents concurrently in a single message. Pass each agent the full diff so it has the complete context.
Agent 1: Code Reuse Review
For each change:
- Search for existing utilities and helpers that could replace newly written code. Look for similar patterns elsewhere in the codebase — common locations are utility directories, shared modules, and files adjacent to the changed ones.
- Flag any new function that duplicates existing functionality. Suggest the existing function to use instead.
- Flag any inline logic that could use an existing utility — hand-rolled string manipulation, manual path handling, custom environment checks, ad-hoc type guards, and similar patterns are common candidates.
Agent 2: Code Quality Review
Review the same changes for hacky patterns:
- Redundant state: state that duplicates existing state, cached values that could be derived, observers/effects that could be direct calls
- Parameter sprawl: adding new parameters to a function instead of generalizing or restructuring existing ones
- Copy-paste with slight variation: near-duplicate code blocks that should be unified with a shared abstraction
- Leaky abstractions: exposing internal details that should be encapsulated, or breaking existing abstraction boundaries
- Stringly-typed code: using raw strings where constants, enums (string unions), or branded types already exist in the codebase
- Unnecessary nesting: wrapper elements that add no layout value
- Unnecessary comments: comments explaining WHAT the code does — delete; keep only non-obvious WHY (hidden constraints, subtle invariants, workarounds)
Agent 3: Efficiency Review
Review the same changes for efficiency:
- Unnecessary work: redundant computations, repeated file reads, duplicate network/API calls, N+1 patterns
- Missed concurrency: independent operations run sequentially when they could run in parallel
- Hot-path bloat: new blocking work added to startup or per-request/per-render hot paths
- Recurring no-op updates: state/store updates that fire unconditionally — add change-detection guards so downstream consumers aren't notified when nothing changed
- Unnecessary existence checks: pre-checking file/resource existence before operating (TOCTOU anti-pattern) — operate directly and handle the error
- Memory: unbounded data structures, missing cleanup, event listener leaks
- Overly broad operations: reading entire files when only a portion is needed, loading all items when filtering for one
Phase 3: Fix Issues
Wait for all three agents to complete. Aggregate their findings and fix each issue directly. If a finding is a false positive or not worth addressing, note it and move on.
When done, briefly summarize what was fixed (or confirm the code was already clean).
1---2name: subagent-review3description: Review changed code for reuse, quality, and efficiency using three parallel disposable subagents. This skill should be used when the user says "review", "simplify", "code review", or wants a one-shot code review without persistent reviewers.4---56# Subagent Review: One-Shot Code Review78Review all changed files for reuse, quality, and efficiency. Fix any issues found.910## Phase 1: Identify Changes1112Run `git diff` (or `git diff HEAD` if there are staged changes) to see what changed. If there are no git changes, review the most recently modified files that the user mentioned or that you edited earlier in this conversation.1314## Phase 2: Launch Three Review Agents in Parallel1516Use the Agent tool to launch all three agents concurrently in a single message. Pass each agent the full diff so it has the complete context.1718### Agent 1: Code Reuse Review1920For each change:21221. **Search for existing utilities and helpers** that could replace newly written code. Look for similar patterns elsewhere in the codebase — common locations are utility directories, shared modules, and files adjacent to the changed ones.232. **Flag any new function that duplicates existing functionality.** Suggest the existing function to use instead.243. **Flag any inline logic that could use an existing utility** — hand-rolled string manipulation, manual path handling, custom environment checks, ad-hoc type guards, and similar patterns are common candidates.2526### Agent 2: Code Quality Review2728Review the same changes for hacky patterns:29301. **Redundant state**: state that duplicates existing state, cached values that could be derived, observers/effects that could be direct calls312. **Parameter sprawl**: adding new parameters to a function instead of generalizing or restructuring existing ones323. **Copy-paste with slight variation**: near-duplicate code blocks that should be unified with a shared abstraction334. **Leaky abstractions**: exposing internal details that should be encapsulated, or breaking existing abstraction boundaries345. **Stringly-typed code**: using raw strings where constants, enums (string unions), or branded types already exist in the codebase356. **Unnecessary nesting**: wrapper elements that add no layout value367. **Unnecessary comments**: comments explaining WHAT the code does — delete; keep only non-obvious WHY (hidden constraints, subtle invariants, workarounds)3738### Agent 3: Efficiency Review3940Review the same changes for efficiency:41421. **Unnecessary work**: redundant computations, repeated file reads, duplicate network/API calls, N+1 patterns432. **Missed concurrency**: independent operations run sequentially when they could run in parallel443. **Hot-path bloat**: new blocking work added to startup or per-request/per-render hot paths454. **Recurring no-op updates**: state/store updates that fire unconditionally — add change-detection guards so downstream consumers aren't notified when nothing changed465. **Unnecessary existence checks**: pre-checking file/resource existence before operating (TOCTOU anti-pattern) — operate directly and handle the error476. **Memory**: unbounded data structures, missing cleanup, event listener leaks487. **Overly broad operations**: reading entire files when only a portion is needed, loading all items when filtering for one4950## Phase 3: Fix Issues5152Wait for all three agents to complete. Aggregate their findings and fix each issue directly. If a finding is a false positive or not worth addressing, note it and move on.5354When done, briefly summarize what was fixed (or confirm the code was already clean).
NikiforovAll