review-driven-development

name

review-driven-development

description

Use when developing features from GitHub/GitLab issues through to merged PRs/MRs with iterative review cycles. Covers: issue research, implementation planning, worktree isolation, coding, testing, PR/MR creation, multi-reviewer code review (current agent, codex exec, claude -p), fix-review loops until APPROVE, merge and cleanup. Composable with TDD, BDD, systematic-debugging, and other methodology skills. Use this whenever: user provides an issue number (#NN), asks to implement a feature from an issue, wants to create a reviewed PR/MR, or needs code reviewed iteratively before merging. Even if the user just says "implement #42" or "work on issue 15", this skill applies.

Review-Driven Development

A complete issue-to-merge workflow where the iterative review cycle is the core driver. The PR/MR doesn't just get created — it gets reviewed N rounds with fixes until the verdict is APPROVE.

Announce at start: "Using review-driven-development to implement issue #NN through the full review cycle."

Overview

Issue → Research → Plan → Worktree → Implement → Test → PR/MR → Review ⟲ Fix → APPROVE → Merge
                                                                 ↑_____________↩ (repeat until clean)

The review cycle (Phase 5) is what separates this from a simple "code and push" workflow. Every PR/MR goes through at least one structured review round, with findings posted directly to the PR/MR. Issues get fixed, re-reviewed, and the cycle repeats until the verdict is APPROVE.

---

Phase 1: Issue Research

When the user provides an issue number:

1. Fetch issue details — auto-detect platform:

   • GitHub: gh issue view <NN> --json title,body,labels,assignees
   • GitLab: glab issue view <NN>
   • If neither works, ask the user for the issue URL

2. Research the codebase — launch Explore agents to understand:

   • What code is involved
   • What patterns exist in the codebase
   • What reference repos or docs are relevant (check CLAUDE.md, memory)

3. Enter plan mode to present the implementation plan

Phase 2: Plan + Worktree

The plan MUST include:

• Worktree setup: directory path, branch name (read CLAUDE.md/memory for naming conventions)
• Files to modify: list the key files with what changes each needs
• Existing code to reuse: functions, patterns, utilities found during research
• Test strategy: what commands to run (read from CLAUDE.md)
• Verification: how to confirm the changes work
• Workflow phases: structure the plan around this skill's 6 phases (Issue Research → Plan + Worktree → Implementation → Commit + PR/MR → Review Cycle → Merge + Cleanup), so the plan serves as both an implementation guide and a workflow tracker

After user approves the plan:

1. Create worktree + branch
2. Rebase onto latest default branch (origin/master or origin/main)
3. Begin implementation

Phase 3: Implementation

Execute the plan following project-specific patterns from CLAUDE.md and memory.

• Follow existing code patterns — read similar files first
• Run project-specific build/test commands (from CLAUDE.md)
• Run real examples or integration tests if applicable
• This phase composes with other skills:
  • If TDD skill is active → write tests first, then implementation
  • If systematic-debugging skill is active → use it when hitting issues
  • If brainstorming skill is active → use it for design decisions

Phase 4: Commit + PR/MR

1. Rebase onto latest default branch (git fetch origin && git rebase origin/master or origin/main). If conflicts arise, enter plan mode to analyze the conflicts and plan the resolution strategy before proceeding.
2. Stage specific files — never git add -A or git add .
3. Commit with descriptive message
4. Push to remote with -u flag (use --force-with-lease if rebased)
5. Create PR/MR:
   • GitHub: gh pr create --title "..." --body-file /tmp/pr_body.md
   • GitLab: glab mr create --title "..." --description "$(cat /tmp/pr_body.md)"
6. PR/MR body format:

## Summary
- Bullet points describing what changed and why

Closes #NN

## Test plan
- [x] Test results summary
- [x] Verification steps completed

Phase 5: Review Cycle (THE CORE)

This is the heart of review-driven development. The PR/MR enters an iterative review loop.

Step 1: Choose review strategy

Ask the user which review strategy to use (only on first review round):

Strategy	Reviewers	When to use
Single	Current agent (code-reviewer subagent)	Quick iterations, small changes
Double	Agent + codex exec "..."	Important features, want second perspective
Triple	Agent + codex exec "..." + claude -p "..."	Critical changes, maximum coverage

Step 2: Execute reviews

For each reviewer, provide the full PR/MR diff and ask them to check:

• Pattern compliance with the codebase (compare against similar existing files)
• Error handling consistency
• Test coverage
• Type safety and correctness
• Any issues categorized as:
  • B (Bug/Important) — must fix before merge
  • S (Suggestion) — nice to have
  • N (Note) — informational only

External reviewers:

# Codex review
codex exec "Review PR #NN for <repo>. Run 'git diff master...HEAD' to see the diff. Check: 1) pattern compliance 2) error handling 3) test coverage 4) correctness. Write findings."

# Claude review
claude -p "Review the git diff for PR #NN. $(git diff master...HEAD). Check pattern compliance, error handling, test coverage. Write findings with B/S/N categorization and a verdict."

Step 3: Post combined review

Post the combined review findings to the PR/MR:

# GitHub
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{NN}/reviews -X POST -f body="$(cat /tmp/review.md)" -f event="COMMENT"

# GitLab
glab mr note {NN} -m "$(cat /tmp/review.md)"

The review comment MUST include:

1. Pattern compliance checklist — table of checks with PASS/FAIL
2. Issues — categorized as B (bug), S (suggestion), N (note)
3. Verdict — APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES

Step 4: Fix issues

Ask the user which issue levels to address (B/S/N or any combination). Then:

1. Enter plan mode — the plan should clearly state:
   • Current phase: Phase 5: Review Cycle
   • Current round: Round N (increment from previous round)
   • Issues to fix: list each issue the user chose to address, with its level (B/S/N)
   • Fix strategy: what changes to make for each issue
   • Re-review plan: after fixes, run the same review strategy again (back to Step 2)
2. Implement fixes
3. Re-run tests
4. Commit + push (new commit, don't amend)
5. Update PR/MR body to reflect current state (updated test counts, fixed issues, etc.)

Step 5: Re-review

Rebase onto latest default branch if needed (enter plan mode if conflicts arise), then run the same review strategy again on the updated code. Post the new review to the PR/MR.

Step 6: Repeat

Continue the fix → re-review loop until the verdict is APPROVE from all reviewers.

Phase 6: Merge + Cleanup

This phase REQUIRES explicit user confirmation. Do NOT auto-merge. Wait for the user to say "merge", "ok merge", "ship it", etc.

Once confirmed:

1. Merge:
   • GitHub: gh pr merge <NN> --merge (or --squash/--rebase per CLAUDE.md)
   • GitLab: glab mr merge <NN>
2. Cleanup:
   • Remove worktree: git worktree remove <path>
   • Delete local branch: git branch -d <branch>
3. Confirm: show the merge commit on the default branch

---

Principles

• CLAUDE.md first — always read project instructions before starting. Build commands, test commands, naming conventions, merge strategy — it's all there.
• Memory — check auto-memory for user preferences and project context from prior sessions.
• Platform agnostic — support both GitHub (gh) and GitLab (glab). Auto-detect from git remote.
• Review is non-negotiable — every PR/MR gets at least one structured review round with findings posted to the PR/MR itself.
• Composable — this skill handles the lifecycle; other skills handle methodology (TDD, debugging, brainstorming).
• Only Phase 6 blocks on user — all other phases proceed autonomously. Phase 6 (merge+cleanup) waits for explicit user confirmation.