Code Review

This skill guides you through performing a high-quality code review. The goal is to improve code quality, share knowledge, and prevent bugs.

How It Works

1. Understand Context: Read the PR description, linked issues, and related documentation. Understand what the code is supposed to do and why.
2. High-Level Check:
   • Does the design make sense?
   • Is it consistent with the existing architecture?
   • Are files organized logically?
3. Detailed Inspection:
   • Correctness: Does it handle edge cases? Are there logic errors?
   • Security: Are there vulnerabilities (e.g., injection, sensitive data exposure)?
   • Performance: Are there inefficient loops, N+1 queries, or memory leaks?
   • Maintainability: Is the code readable? Are names descriptive? Is it DRY?
   • Tests: Is there adequate test coverage? Are tests meaningful?
4. Feedback: Provide clear, actionable, and polite feedback. Distinguish between blocking issues and nitpicks.

Checklist

Logic & Correctness

• Edge cases are handled (e.g., empty lists, null values).
• Error handling is robust.
• No race conditions or concurrency issues.

Security

• Input is validated and sanitized.
• No hardcoded secrets.
• Authorization checks are present.

Performance

• No unnecessary computations or I/O in loops.
• Database queries are optimized.
• Resources are properly released.

Maintainability

• Variable and function names are clear and descriptive.
• Functions are small and focused (Single Responsibility Principle).
• No commented-out code.

Testing

• New code is covered by tests.
• Tests verify behavior, not implementation details.

Feedback Guidelines

• Be Specific: specific examples or suggestions.
• Be Constructive: Focus on the code, not the author.
• Prioritize: Mark critical issues as "Blocking". Use "Nitpick" for minor suggestions.
• Suggest Code: When possible, provide a code snippet showing the suggested change.

Present Results to User

Use the following template when presenting the review:

## Code Review Summary

[Brief summary of the review]

## Key Findings

### 🔴 Blocking / Critical
*   [Issue description] - [Why it matters]
    *   Suggestion: `...`

### 🟡 Major / Important
*   [Issue description]
    *   Suggestion: `...`

### 🟢 Minor / Nitpicks
*   [Issue description]

## Verdict
[Approve / Request Changes / Comment]

Troubleshooting

• Too large PR: If the PR is too large (>400 lines), suggest splitting it or review it in chunks.
• Unclear Context: If the PR description is missing, ask for clarification before reviewing.
• Disagreement: If the author disagrees, focus on the problem and objective data, not opinions.