frontend-review

name	frontend-review
description	Static source review of an app's interface layer — API client and auth plumbing, state management, component quality, i18n, type safety, accessibility, test coverage, build hygiene — written to docs/FRONTEND-REVIEW.md. Use when the user asks for a frontend code review or a source-level complement to live testing. Runs without the app running.
user-invocable	true
argument-hint	["src-path"]

Frontend Review

Your task is to review the interface layer's source and write docs/FRONTEND-REVIEW.md in the target project. No live app needed — this review reads code, and is safe to run as a background subagent alongside live testing.

Contract

Two rules shape every finding:

1. No duplication. Read sibling docs first (docs/E2E-TEST-PLAN.md, docs/UI-UX-REVIEW.md) if they exist. A finding already catalogued there appears here only when this review adds a new, distinct root cause — and the doc header states this contract, naming the docs it complements.
2. Honesty about limits. Findings that can't be verified from source alone (contrast ratios, focus behavior, whether a bug reproduces live) go in a closing "Needs live confirmation" section, not asserted as fact.

Steps

1. Scope — The interface layer is whatever the user touches: a React/Vue src/, a CLI's arg-parsing and output modules, an API's route handlers and serializers. Name the scope in the doc header.

2. Review by dimension — Work through references/review-dimensions.md. Skip dimensions that don't apply to the app type and say which were skipped.

3. Verify each finding at its citation — Every finding carries file:line. Re-read the cited lines before writing the finding; a claim that doesn't reproduce at its citation is dropped.

4. Map test coverage — The three-column table from the dimensions reference: covered directly / indirectly / not at all. Tie coverage gaps to bugs found in other dimensions where the gap explains them.

5. Close — Severity-tagged findings throughout (same 🔴/🟡/🔵 rubric as ui-ux-review), a coverage-gaps summary, and the "Needs live confirmation" list.