Requesting Code Review

Code Review

Review code changes for production readiness. Used both for self-review (before merge) and PR review (via /pr skill).

Review Principles

• Verify everything — don't assume code is correct or incorrect. Read actual files, understand the codebase context, trace through the logic. If you're not sure about something, investigate before commenting. No assumptions.
• Resolved review threads — context only. Read what was requested and how it was resolved. Do NOT re-raise. Use to inform understanding if relevant, otherwise discard.
• receiving-code-review takes precedence — for communication style and how to handle feedback, defer to that skill.

When to Review

Mandatory:

• After each task in subagent-driven development
• After completing major feature
• Before merge to main
• When /pr skill invokes this for PR review

Optional but valuable:

• When stuck (fresh perspective)
• Before refactoring (baseline check)
• After fixing complex bug

How to Review

1. Get git range:

BASE_SHA=$(git merge-base origin/<base-branch> HEAD)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

2. Get the diff and changed files:

git diff --stat "$BASE_SHA".."$HEAD_SHA"
git diff "$BASE_SHA".."$HEAD_SHA"
git diff --name-only "$BASE_SHA".."$HEAD_SHA"

Never use gh pr diff — local diff is the source of truth.

3. Read changed files for full context — not just diff hunks.

4. Review using the checklist and output format in code-reviewer.md.

5. Act on findings:

• Fix Critical issues immediately
• Fix Important issues before proceeding
• Note Minor issues for later
• Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)

Self-Review via Subagent

For self-review during development, dispatch a code-reviewer subagent:

Use Task tool with code-reviewer type, fill template at code-reviewer.md

Placeholders:

• {WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED} - What you just built
• {PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS} - What it should do
• {BASE_SHA} - Starting commit
• {HEAD_SHA} - Ending commit
• {DESCRIPTION} - Brief summary

Red Flags

Never:

• Skip review because "it's simple"
• Ignore Critical issues
• Proceed with unfixed Important issues
• Argue with valid technical feedback

If reviewer wrong:

• Push back with technical reasoning
• Show code/tests that prove it works
• Request clarification

See template at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md

Converted and distributed by TomeVault — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.