بنقرة واحدة
sup-requesting-code-review
// Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
// Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
Answer questions about BrowserOS internal stuff (setup, features, architecture, design decisions) by reading the private internal-docs submodule and the codebase. Use for "how do I X", "where is Y", "what is the deal with Z", or any question that mixes ops/setup knowledge with code knowledge. Can execute steps with per-command confirmation.
Draft a 1-page internal doc (feature, architecture, or design) for the private browseros-ai/internal-docs repo. Use when wrapping up a feature on a branch, after the PR is open or about to be opened. Skill drafts from the diff, asks four sharp questions, enforces voice rules, and opens a PR to internal-docs.
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies
Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a separate session with review checkpoints
Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work - guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup
| name | sup-requesting-code-review |
| description | Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements |
Dispatch superpowers: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 superpowers: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 superpowers:code-reviewer subagent]
WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: Verification and repair functions for conversation index
PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Task 2 from .llm/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