review

name	review
description	Comprehensive code review with multi-angle analysis using parallel agents

SKILL: Multi-Angle Code Review

Purpose: Comprehensive plan review with gap detection, extended reviews, and GPT expert delegation Target: plan-reviewer Agent reviewing plans before execution

---

Quick Start

When to Use

• Review plan before execution (/01_confirm, /review)
• Detect gaps in external service integration
• Validate test plan completeness

Quick Reference

# Load plan → Detect type → Run reviews → Apply findings
/review .pilot/plan/pending/plan.md

In Scope: 8 mandatory reviews, extended reviews, gap detection, findings application

Out of Scope: Plan creation → spec-driven-workflow | Test execution → tdd | GPT delegation → @.claude/rules/delegator/orchestration.md

---

Execution Steps

Core Philosophy: Comprehensive (multi-angle) | Actionable (findings map to sections) | Severity-based (BLOCKING → Interactive Recovery)

---

Team Lead Role

Delegate Mode: Team Lead operates in coordinate-only mode (Shift+Tab)

Pattern: Spawn review-team → Monitor reviewers → Aggregate findings → Update plan

Native Context Isolation: Agent Teams provides automatic context isolation per teammate

---

Step 1: Load Plan

PLAN_PATH="${1:-$(find "$(pwd)/.pilot/plan/pending" "$(pwd)/.pilot/plan/in_progress" -name "*.md" -type f | head -1)}"
[ -f "$PLAN_PATH" ] || { echo "❌ No plan found"; exit 1; }

---

Step 2: Multi-Angle Review Team

Create review-team with specialized teammates:

Teammate 1: Test Coverage Reviewer

Spawn teammate "test-reviewer" with prompt:
  "You are a tester (see @.claude/agents/tester.md).
  Review test coverage for plan: $PLAN_PATH.
  Evaluate: SCs verifiable? test commands? coverage ≥80%?
  Discuss findings with other reviewers via Message.
  Output: PASS or FAIL with detailed findings."

Teammate 2: Type Safety & Quality Reviewer

Spawn teammate "quality-reviewer" with prompt:
  "You are a validator (see @.claude/agents/validator.md).
  Review type safety and code quality for plan: $PLAN_PATH.
  Evaluate: TypeScript types? lint config? quality (SRP/DRY/KISS)?
  Discuss findings with other reviewers via Message.
  Output: PASS or FAIL with detailed findings."

Teammate 3: Deep Code Reviewer

Spawn teammate "deep-reviewer" with prompt:
  "You are a code-reviewer (see @.claude/agents/code-reviewer.md).
  Perform deep code quality review for plan: $PLAN_PATH.
  Evaluate: architecture? function size (≤50)? file size (≤200)? nesting ≤3? edge cases?
  Discuss findings with other reviewers via Message.
  Output: PASS or FAIL with detailed findings."

Teammate 4: Security Reviewer

Spawn teammate "security-reviewer" with prompt:
  "You are a security-analyst (see @.claude/agents/security-analyst.md).
  Review security aspects for plan: $PLAN_PATH.
  Evaluate: input validation? auth/authz? secret management? OWASP Top 10?
  Discuss findings with other reviewers via Message.
  Output: PASS or FAIL with detailed findings."

Key Enhancement: Reviewers cross-reference and debate findings via direct messaging before Team Lead aggregates final report.

---

Step 3: Process Findings

Level	Symbol	Action
BLOCKING	🛑	Interactive Recovery
Critical	🚨	Must fix
Warning	⚠️	Should fix
Suggestion	💡	Nice to have

echo "$findings" | grep -q "🛑.*BLOCKING" && { echo "🛑 BLOCKING"; return 1; }

---

Step 4: Update Plan

Issue Type	Target Section	Method
Missing step	Execution Plan	Add checkbox
Unclear requirement	User Requirements	Clarify wording
Test gap	Test Plan	Add scenario
Risk identified	Risks	Add item
Missing dependency	Scope	Add requirement

---

Review Workflow

Step 0: Extract SC count

sc_count=$(grep -c "^- \[.\] \*\*SC-" "$PLAN_PATH" || echo "0")

Step 1: Search "needs investigation/confirmation/review" keywords

Step 2: Type detection (code, config, docs, scenario, infra, db, ai)

Step 3: 8 mandatory reviews

1. Development Principles: SOLID, DRY, KISS, YAGNI
2. Project Structure: File locations, naming
3. Requirement Completeness: Explicit + implicit
4. Logic Errors: Order, dependencies, edge cases
5. Existing Code Reuse: Search utilities, patterns
6. Better Alternatives: Simpler/scalable approaches
7. Project Alignment: Type-check, API docs
8. Long-term Impact: Consequences, technical debt

Step 5: Extended reviews (type-activated)

• A: API Compatibility | B: Type Safety | C: Documentation | D: Test Coverage
• E: Migration | F: Deployment | G: Prompt Engineering | H: Scenarios

Step 6: Autonomous perspectives

• Security | Performance | UX | Maintainability | Concurrency | Error Recovery

Step 7: Gap detection (BLOCKING → Interactive Recovery)

• 9.1: External API | 9.2: Database | 9.3: Async | 9.4: File Ops
• 9.5: Env Vars | 9.6: Error Handling | 9.7: Test Plan (BLOCKING)

Step 9.5: Multi-angle review-team (5+ SCs)

# For complex plans (5+ SCs), add design-reviewer teammate if frontend changes detected
[ "$sc_count" -ge 5 ] && grep -qiE "component|UI|frontend|React|Vue" "$PLAN_PATH" && echo "🚀 Add design-reviewer teammate"

Step 10: GPT expert (5+ SCs or architecture/security/auth)

[ "$sc_count" -ge 5 ] || echo "$PLAN_PATH" | grep -qiE "architecture|security|auth" && echo "🤖 GPT"

---

Further Reading

Internal: @.claude/skills/review/REFERENCE.md - Detailed review criteria, gap detection, GPT delegation | @.claude/rules/delegator/orchestration.md - GPT expert delegation | @.claude/skills/parallel-subagents/SKILL.md - Multi-angle parallel review | @.claude/agents/code-reviewer.md - Code reviewer output format

External: Code Review by Jason Cohen | The Art of Readable Code