| name | code-review |
| description | Review pull requests and code changes in the Azure SDK for JavaScript repository. USE FOR: GitHub Copilot code review; CCR; review pull request; review PR; review diff; find bugs or regressions introduced by a PR; cross-domain SDK review. Finds high-confidence correctness, security, API compatibility, performance, dependency, documentation, and test issues. DO NOT USE FOR: implementing fixes; running tests; fixing CI; releases; APIView feedback. |
Azure SDK for JavaScript Code Review
Use this skill for GitHub Copilot code review (CCR) and other broad pull
request reviews. If the task already assigns a narrower specialist role, that
scope remains authoritative; use this skill's evidence and quality gates
without expanding the specialist review.
Review Process
- Read the pull request description and identify the intended behavior.
- Categorize the changed files and apply only the relevant guidance below.
- Review correctness and behavioral regressions first, then apply the
relevant SDK-specific checks.
- Trace changes through callers, exports, tests, API reports, documentation,
and package metadata when those relationships affect correctness.
- Inspect enough unchanged context to verify existing guards, invariants, and
behavior before reporting a finding.
For files outside sdk/, review for correctness, security, regressions, and
test coverage without imposing SDK-only conventions.
Load Guidance Progressively
The path-specific reviewer instructions are canonical. Load a full specialist
prompt only when the changed surface or a suspected risk needs deeper analysis.
Do not load every prompt for every pull request.
| Changed surface or risk | Canonical instruction | Optional deep checklist |
|---|
| SDK source or API report | .github/instructions/reviewer/sdk-source.instructions.md | .github/prompts/architecture-review-guidelines.md, .github/prompts/security-review-guidelines.md, or .github/prompts/performance-review-guidelines.md |
| Tests or coverage implications | .github/instructions/reviewer/testing.instructions.md | .github/prompts/test-review-guidelines.md |
| README, CHANGELOG, TSDoc, snippets, or samples | .github/instructions/reviewer/documentation.instructions.md | .github/prompts/documentation-review-guidelines.md |
| Package manifests or workspace catalogs | .github/instructions/reviewer/dependencies.instructions.md | .github/prompts/dependency-review-guidelines.md |
sdk/*/arm-* management packages | .github/instructions/reviewer/mgmt-sdk.instructions.md | .github/prompts/mgmt-review-guidelines.md |
pnpm-lock.yaml | .github/instructions/reviewer/lockfile.instructions.md | None; do not comment on lockfile churn |
Management-specific instructions take precedence over conflicting generic SDK
rules. Treat snippets.spec.ts as documentation source, not as a test. Before
calling an API removal breaking, establish that it existed in the last GA
release.
Generated code is output, not the fix location. Do not comment on
generated/ or src/generated/ files. If generated output exposes a real
management API or tooling defect covered by the management guidance, report
the root cause once on the nearest actionable changed surface and identify the
upstream fix.
