requesting-code-review
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
القائمة
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session
Use when you have a spec for a non-trivial task with non-obvious sequencing, multiple coordinated files, or unclear ordering of steps. SKIP when the task is mechanical (add one file, edit a config, one-liner) or when the implementation order is obvious from the request.
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes
Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment
Use for non-trivial implementations involving design choices, multiple components, or unclear requirements. Explores ideas through dialogue, then produces a technical analysis with architecture, phases, risks, and cross-check reviews. SKIP for mechanical/single-file changes (Dockerfile, CI YAML, config tweak, one-liner) or when the user has already specified exactly what to build.
Use when starting any conversation - establishes how to find and use skills, requiring Skill tool invocation before ANY response including clarifying questions
| name | requesting-code-review |
| description | Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements |
Dispatch cf-powers:code-reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.
Core principle: Review early, review often.
Mandatory:
Optional but valuable:
1. Get git SHAs:
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1) # or origin/main
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
2. Dispatch code-reviewer subagent:
Use Task tool with cf-powers: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 summary3. Act on feedback:
[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]
You: Let me request code review before proceeding.
BASE_SHA=$(git log --oneline | grep "Task 1" | head -1 | awk '{print $1}')
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
[Dispatch cf-powers:code-reviewer subagent]
WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from docs/plans/deployment-plan.md
BASE_SHA: a7981ec
HEAD_SHA: 3df7661
DESCRIPTION: Added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() with 4 issue types
[Subagent returns]:
Strengths: Clean architecture, real tests
Issues:
Important: Missing progress indicators
Minor: Magic number (100) for reporting interval
Assessment: Ready to proceed
You: [Fix progress indicators]
[Continue to Task 3]
Subagent-Driven Development:
Executing Plans:
Ad-Hoc Development:
Never:
If reviewer wrong:
See template at: requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md