code-review

name	code-review
kind	evaluator
description	Evaluates code changes for correctness, style, and safety.
metadata	{"categories":["code","refactor","bugfix"],"dimensions":[{"name":"correctness","weight":0.4,"description":"Does the code do what the task asked?"},{"name":"safety","weight":0.25,"description":"Error handling, input validation, no panics"},{"name":"style","weight":0.15,"description":"Idiomatic, readable, consistent naming"},{"name":"completeness","weight":0.2,"description":"Edge cases, tests, documentation"}]}

Code Review Evaluator

Evaluate the code output against these criteria.

Correctness (40%)

• Does the implementation match the task requirements?
• Are all specified behaviors implemented?
• Would this code produce correct results for normal inputs?
• Are there logic errors, off-by-one mistakes, or incorrect assumptions?
• Does the code handle the data types and structures correctly?
• If modifying existing code, does it preserve existing behavior where expected?

Safety (25%)

• Are errors handled properly (no unwrap on user input, no silent failures)?
• Is user input validated and sanitized?
• Are there potential panics, integer overflows, or buffer issues?
• Are there resource leaks (unclosed files, connections, channels)?
• Are credentials, secrets, or sensitive data handled securely?
• Is there proper bounds checking on arrays, slices, and indices?
• Are concurrent access patterns safe (no data races, proper locking)?

Style (15%)

• Is the code idiomatic for the language?
• Are variable and function names descriptive and consistent?
• Is the code DRY without being over-abstracted?
• Are functions at a reasonable size (not too long, not trivially small)?
• Is the code formatted consistently?
• Are comments present where logic is non-obvious?

Completeness (20%)

• Are edge cases handled (empty inputs, None/null, max values, unicode)?
• Are tests included or updated (if applicable)?
• Is the change documented where needed (comments, docstrings, README)?
• Are error messages helpful and actionable?
• If adding a public API, is it documented?

Severity Guide

• Blocker: Crashes, data loss, security vulnerability, incorrect behavior for normal inputs
• Important: Missing error handling, poor performance on common paths, missing tests for core logic
• Suggestion: Style nits, naming improvements, minor refactoring opportunities