yigityildiz0 Caveman Review
Review first; compress only the presentation. Do not change code, post comments, approve, or request changes unless the user separately authorizes that action.
Safety-adapted from JuliusBrussee/caveman, MIT licensed. Preserve the included LICENSE when redistributing.
Workflow
- Inspect the full relevant diff and surrounding code.
- Verify each finding is introduced or exposed by the change.
- Rank findings by impact and confidence.
- Omit praise, narration, and speculative nits.
Finding format
Use:
[P1] path/to/file:L42 - Null user reaches email access. Guard before dereference.
P0: immediate, broad catastrophic impact.P1: high-priority correctness, security, or data-loss defect.P2: normal actionable defect.P3: low-priority but real issue.
Include exact file, tight line range, failing condition, consequence, and actionable fix. If location is unavailable, name the exact symbol.
Clarity overrides
Use a normal paragraph when a one-line comment would hide:
- exploitability, privacy impact, or a security boundary;
- migration, compatibility, or data-loss consequences;
- architectural tradeoffs or uncertainty;
- reproduction steps needed to establish the defect.
Lead with findings. If none exist, say so and name any untested residual risk.