# Code Review > Review current git changes or latest commit using code-reviewer and architect-reviewer agents. Use after completing code changes to get comprehensive quality feedback. Use when this capability is needed. - Skill: `tomevault-io/code-review-139` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add tomevault-io/code-review-139` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/tomevault-io/code-review-139/raw - Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS) - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: tomevault-io (https://skillmd.com/u/tomevault-io) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/tomevault-io/code-review-139 --- # Code Review Command ## Purpose Perform comprehensive code review of current changes or latest commit. Automatically invokes: - **code-reviewer agent**: Always (code quality, security, maintainability) - **architect-reviewer agent**: Conditionally (architectural impact assessment) --- ## Workflow ### 1. Determine Review Target **Check for uncommitted changes:** ```bash git status --porcelain ``` **Decision:** - If changes exist: Review uncommitted changes via `git diff HEAD` (staged + unstaged) - If no changes: Review latest commit via `git log -1` and `git show HEAD` - If user specified a commit hash: Review that commit via `git show ` **Empty diff guard:** If no diff output is produced, report "No changes to review" and stop. ### 2. Exclusion Patterns Filter out the following from diff analysis and agent prompts: - Lock files: `package-lock.json`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, `yarn.lock`, `go.sum`, `Cargo.lock` - Generated/build: `dist/`, `build/`, `*.generated.*`, `*.min.*` - Source maps: `*.map` - Binary/media: images, fonts, compiled artifacts Use `git diff HEAD -- . ':!package-lock.json' ':!pnpm-lock.yaml' ':!yarn.lock' ':!go.sum' ':!Cargo.lock' ':!dist' ':!build'` to exclude these. ### 3. Analyze Change Scope **Extract metrics from git output:** Count: - Files changed - Lines added/removed - Directories affected - New files vs modifications Detect: - Database migration files (`migrations/`, `schema.prisma`, `*.sql`) - API contract files (`*.graphql`, `openapi.yaml`, `*.proto`, API route files) - Configuration files (`package.json`, `go.mod`, `pyproject.toml`, `Cargo.toml`, `build.gradle`, `docker-compose.yml`) - Infrastructure files (`*.tf`, `Dockerfile`, K8s manifests, CI/CD configs) - Security-sensitive files (`auth/`, `**/middleware/auth*`, `*.pem`, `*.key`) - New directories or modules ### 4. Invoke code-reviewer Agent **Always execute using Task tool with subagent_type: "code-reviewer":** Provide structured context to avoid redundant discovery: ``` ## Review Context - **Target**: {uncommitted changes / commit } - **Work Type**: {feature/bugfix/refactor/chore/prototype} - **Commit Message**: {message from git log or commit_message.md} ## Scope Boundary Architecture concerns (component boundaries, module coupling, system scalability, deployment architecture) are out of scope. Do NOT review these. ## Diff {see diff size rules below} ``` **Diff size rules:** - **≤ 500 lines**: Include full diff inline - **> 500 lines**: Include `git diff --stat` summary only, and instruct: "Read specific files using Read tool as needed for detailed review." ### 5. Conditional architect-reviewer Invocation **Scope Classification Criteria** (score each criterion met): | Criterion | Threshold | Score | | --------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------- | ----- | | Files Modified | ≥ 8 files | +1 | | Total Lines Changed | ≥ 300 lines | +1 | | Directories Affected | ≥ 3 directories | +1 | | New Module/Package | New directory with ≥3 files | +1 | | API Contract Changes | Modified: schema/, .graphql, .proto, api/, routes | +2 | | Database Schema | Modified: migrations, schema files, ORM models | +2 | | Config/Infrastructure | Modified: docker-compose, Dockerfile, K8s, CI/CD, .tf | +1 | | Dependency Changes | Modified: package.json, go.mod, requirements.txt | +1 | | Security-Sensitive | Modified: auth/, middleware/auth*, *.pem, \*.key | +2 | **Decision**: - **Score < 3** → Invoke `code-reviewer` only - **Score ≥ 3** → Invoke both `code-reviewer` and `architect-reviewer` **in parallel** (two Task calls in one message) **architect-reviewer structured context:** ``` ## Review Context - **Target**: {uncommitted changes / commit } - **Work Type**: {feature/bugfix/refactor/chore/prototype} - **Commit Message**: {message} - **Scope Score**: {score} (triggered: {list of criteria met}) - **Key Change Areas**: {directories/modules with most impact} ## Scope Boundary Line-level code quality (naming, formatting, individual function logic, test coverage) is out of scope. Do NOT review these. ## Diff {same diff size rules as code-reviewer} ``` --- ## Error Handling - **Empty diff** → Report "No changes to review" and stop - **Git command failure** → Report the error with the failed command - **Agent failure** → Include partial results from successful agent + note which agent failed - **Agent reports no issues** → Include "No issues found" in the relevant section --- ## Output Format **Generate consolidated review summary:** ```markdown # Code Review Report **Generated**: {timestamp} **Scope**: {uncommitted changes / latest commit: {hash}} **Files Changed**: {count} **Reviewers Invoked**: code-reviewer{, architect-reviewer if applicable} --- ## 📊 Change Summary - **Lines**: +{added} -{removed} - **Files**: {count} ({new_count} new, {modified_count} modified) - **Directories**: {affected directories} --- ## 🔍 Code Reviewer Feedback {consolidated output from code-reviewer agent} --- ## 🏗️ Architecture Reviewer Feedback {if invoked, consolidated output from architect-reviewer agent} {if not invoked, state: "Architectural review not required for this change scope"} --- ## ✅ Review Checklist Based on agent feedback, generate action items: ### Critical (Must Fix) - [ ] {issue 1} - [ ] {issue 2} ### Warning (Should Fix) - [ ] {issue 3} ### Suggestion (Consider) - [ ] {improvement 1} --- ## 📝 Next Steps {recommended actions based on review results} ``` --- ## Important Notes - **Never modify code directly** - this command only performs review - **Agent autonomy**: code-reviewer and architect-reviewer may read files, run tests, or analyze dependencies as needed - **Coding guidelines**: code-reviewer checks for coding standard violations - **Incremental reviews**: For large changes (>20 files), agents may focus on high-impact areas first - **Git safety**: All git commands are read-only (status, diff, log, show) --- ## Example Usage ```bash # Review uncommitted changes /code-review # Review specific commit (pass commit hash in conversation) # User: "Review commit abc123" # Then: /code-review ``` --- > Converted and distributed by [TomeVault](https://tomevault.io/claim/kubrickcode) — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.