| name | code-review-lite |
| description | Abbreviated code review for small or low-stakes code changes. Skips requirements gathering. Skips the linter in PR mode (CI runs it). Focuses on correctness against obvious intent, readability, and pattern consistency. For large or security-sensitive diffs, use code-review-deep instead. |
| when_to_use | Use for code reviews on small, low-stakes diffs (no security paths, under ~500 lines). Invoked directly with a PR URL or diff file path, or dispatched by `/code-review`. Follow all steps in order; do not shortcut based on this description. |
| argument-hint | [PR URL | path to diff file] [--source=...] [--pr=<URL>] [--file=<path>] [--lint] |
| effort | high |
| allowed-tools | Bash(git *) Bash(gh *) Bash(composer *) Bash(npm *) Bash(make *) Read Grep |
Steps
1. Source and diff
Read ~/.claude/skills/code-review/references/review-shared.md and follow its source detection and diff fetching sections. If --source and the corresponding identifier args were passed, use those and skip any prompting.
2. Lint (conditional)
Skip the linter when source mode is pr and --lint was not passed (CI runs the linter on the PR).
Otherwise run the linter per the linter detection section of the shared doc.
3. Load language references (conditional)
If any changed path matches \.(js|jsx|ts|tsx|mjs|cjs)$, read ~/.claude/skills/code-review/references/js-security.md.
4. GitHub Actions hash verification (conditional)
If the diff contains any line matching ^\+\s*uses:\s+\S+@[0-9a-f]{40}, run the verification per the shared doc.
5. Review
Read ~/.claude/skills/code-review/references/review-checklist.md first for general principles.
Focus on:
- Correctness against obvious intent. Lite reviews do not gather requirements; reason about what the diff is trying to do from the code itself.
- Readability and naming.
- Matches existing patterns in the file or nearby files.
- Dead code, debug artefacts, accidental scope creep.
- Security issues that are visible without deep analysis (hardcoded secrets, obvious injection, missing input validation on user-facing entry points).
Do not deep-dive architecture or push for refactors beyond the diff. Honour the common review rules in the shared doc.
6. Output
Format per the output section of ~/.claude/skills/code-review/references/review-shared.md.
