toss PR Review
Fetch recent PRs, classify, read source code, and produce contextual reviews.
Input
$ARGUMENTS — Number of PRs (default: 10)
Examples:
/pr-review— 10 most recent open PRs/pr-review 20— 20 PRs
Workflow
1. Fetch recent PRs
gh pr list --repo toss/es-toolkit --state open --limit {count} --json number,title,author,labels,createdAt
2. Triage each PR
Run /pr-triage {number} for each PR to classify.
3. Deep review per PR
For each PR, go beyond classification — read the actual source code and provide context:
a. Read current code
Read the files being modified on main to understand the current behavior:
- Function source: what it does, how it works
- Existing tests: what's already covered
- JSDoc: documented behavior and examples
b. Understand the PR change
Read the diff to understand what's changing:
- What's the before vs after?
- Why does the contributor say this change is needed?
- Does the change match what the code actually needs?
c. Assess impact
- Breaking changes: Does the function signature change? Will existing users be affected?
- JS spec alignment: Does current behavior follow JS/lodash conventions? Does the PR break that?
- Scope: Are all affected files updated? (e.g., docs in all 4 languages, related functions)
- Design principles: Does this align with es-toolkit's 85% use case / simplicity philosophy?
d. Label-specific checks
- compat-fix: Run
/compat-review {number} - new-function: Check completeness (impl + spec + re-export + 4 lang docs)
- core-change:
yarn vitest run src/{category}/{fn}.spec.ts+ review breaking impact - docs: Check all 4 language files updated consistently
- types:
tsc --noEmit
4. Detect duplicates
Group PRs by same function name or same files modified.
5. Report per PR
For each PR, output:
### PR #{number} — {title}
**Classification**: {labels}
**Changed files**: {summary}
**Current code**: {what the function does now, with code snippet}
**PR change**: {what's changing and why, with before/after}
**Context**: {JS spec, lodash behavior, design principle considerations}
**Checkpoints**:
- {specific things to verify}
**Verdict**: {merge / merge with changes / hold for discussion / reject}
6. Summary
## PR Review — {date}
| # | Title | Label | Verdict |
|---|-------|-------|---------|
- {N} ready to merge
- {N} need changes
- {N} need discussion
- {N} potential duplicates