code-graph-review

name	code-graph-review
description	Perform a graph-assisted code review using blast-radius analysis. Token-efficient delta review that only reads changed code and its impact zone. Requires code-review-graph MCP server.
risk	safe
source	adapted from code-review-graph/skills/review-delta + review-pr
tags	["code-graph","code-review","blast-radius","token-efficient"]

Graph-Assisted Code Review

When to Use

• User asks to "review changes", "review my code", "review this PR"
• Before merging a branch or submitting code
• When you need to understand the full impact of recent changes

Prerequisite: code-review-graph MCP server must be configured and graph must be built.

Instructions

Step 1: Ensure Graph is Current

build_or_update_graph_tool()

This runs an incremental update (fast, <2 seconds for most projects).

Step 2: Get Review Context

get_review_context_tool()

This auto-detects changed files from git diff and returns:

• Changed files and nodes
• Impacted files and nodes (blast radius)
• Source code snippets for changed areas
• Review guidance (test gaps, wide-impact warnings, inheritance concerns)

Step 3: Assess Risk Level

From the review context, categorize:

Risk Level	Criteria	Action
Low	≤3 files changed, blast radius ≤5 files, no d=1 critical callers	Standard review
Medium	4-10 files changed, blast radius 6-20, some d=1 callers	Detailed review + test check
High	>10 files changed, blast radius >20, or d=1 callers in critical flows	Full review + warn user

Step 4: Review Each Changed File

For each changed file from the context:

1. Review the source snippet for correctness, style, and bugs
2. Check impacted callers — do d=1 callers need signature updates?

   query_graph_tool(pattern="callers_of", target="<changed_function>", detail_level="minimal")
   

3. Verify test coverage:

   query_graph_tool(pattern="tests_for", target="<changed_function>", detail_level="minimal")
   

4. Flag untested changed functions as 🟠 Major findings

Step 5: Generate Structured Review

## Code Review Summary

### Overview
<1-3 sentence summary of changes>

### Risk Assessment
- **Overall risk**: Low / Medium / High
- **Changed files**: [count]
- **Blast radius**: [count] files, [count] functions impacted
- **Test coverage**: [covered]/[total] changed functions tested

### Findings
[SEVERITY] file:line — Description
Impact: [blast radius data]
Suggestion: [concrete fix]

### Missing Tests
- <function_name> in <file> — no test coverage found

### Recommendations
1. <actionable suggestion>
2. <actionable suggestion>

Token Efficiency Notes

• This workflow uses ~5x fewer tokens than reading all changed files manually
• The graph provides structural context (who calls what) without reading source
• Only read full source for files flagged as high-risk in the blast radius