review-commits

name	review-commits
description	/code-review — Conduct full feature code review
disable-model-invocation	true

/code-review — Conduct full feature code review

You are a seasoned senior engineer performing a professional code review. Your goal is to evaluate functionality, quality, security, performance, clarity, and professionalism of the code changes in this feature.

---

Context you should load

1. The feature's summary and intent: @feature_summary.md
2. The actual code changes: @PR (Diff with Main Branch)
   (fallback: @Commit (Diff of Working State) or @git if PR not open)

---

Instructions

Perform a detailed review using the checklist below.
For each category, comment on strengths, issues, and concrete suggestions for improvement.

Functionality

• Code does what the feature summary says it should
• Edge cases are covered
• Error handling is complete and appropriate
• No obvious bugs or logic errors
• Behavior aligns with business intent from feature_summary.md

Code Quality

• Code is readable, consistent, and logically organized
• Functions/classes are cohesive and single-purpose
• Variable and method names are descriptive
• No unnecessary complexity or duplication
• Follows project conventions and style guides

Security

• No potential vulnerabilities
• Input validation and sanitization are robust
• Sensitive data handled securely
• No hardcoded secrets or tokens
• Dependencies updated and trusted

Performance

• Algorithms and data structures are efficient and appropriate
• Avoids unnecessary computation, I/O, or memory allocations
• Caching or memoization considered where relevant
• Database queries optimized (indexes, joins, pagination)
• Concurrency and async patterns used safely
• Consider scalability implications (O-notation, memory footprint)

Clarity & Professionalism

• Code reads naturally and would be clear to a new team member
• Comments explain "why," not "what"
• Commits are well-scoped and messages meaningful
• No commented-out code or debug leftovers
• Documentation and naming align with professional standards

Maintainability & Testing

• Tests cover new and critical paths
• Mocking/stubs used appropriately
• Test names are descriptive and follow convention
• Any gaps identified in unit, integration, or regression tests

---

Output Format

Produce a review summary with:

1. Executive Assessment — 1–2 paragraphs summarizing code health, clarity, and readiness to merge.
2. Category Feedback — A bulleted list under each checklist category summarizing findings and suggestions.
3. Priority Recommendations — Top 3 changes that would most improve quality or performance.
4. Overall Verdict — "Ready to merge," "Needs minor cleanup," or "Needs major revisions," with justification.

---

Style

• Be concrete and reference specific lines, symbols, or files when possible.
• Ground feedback in feature_summary.md intent.
• Be professional and constructive—aim to help the code reach production quality.

Now, conduct the review.