code-review-repo

name	code-review-repo
description	Review local codebase for bugs and CLAUDE.md compliance using multi-agent analysis
allowed-tools	["Read","Glob","Grep","Task","Bash(git:*)","Bash(gh:*)"]

Local Code Review

Review the entire local codebase for bugs, issues, and CLAUDE.md compliance.

Process

1. Gather CLAUDE.md files: Use a Haiku agent to find all CLAUDE.md files in the repository (root and subdirectories)

2. Identify source files: Determine which files to review:

   • Include: .ts, .tsx, .js, .jsx, .py, .rs, .go and similar source files
   • Exclude: node_modules/, dist/, .git/, vendor directories, generated files

3. Multi-agent review: Launch 5 parallel Sonnet agents to independently review the codebase. Each agent returns a list of issues with reasons:

   • Agent #1: Audit for CLAUDE.md compliance. Check that code follows guidelines in all relevant CLAUDE.md files.
   • Agent #2: Shallow bug scan. Look for obvious bugs, error handling issues, and logic errors. Focus on significant bugs, not nitpicks.
   • Agent #3: Git history context. Use git blame and history to identify patterns, recent changes, and potential issues in light of historical context.
   • Agent #4: Previous PR comments. Check closed PRs that touched these files for any feedback that might apply.
   • Agent #5: Code comment compliance. Ensure code follows any guidance in TODO, FIXME, NOTE, or other code comments.

4. Confidence scoring: For each issue found, launch a parallel Haiku agent to score confidence (0-100):

   • 0: False positive, doesn't hold up to scrutiny
   • 25: Might be real, but unverified. Stylistic issues not in CLAUDE.md
   • 50: Real but minor, rarely hit in practice
   • 75: Verified real issue, important, directly impacts functionality or mentioned in CLAUDE.md
   • 100: Definitely real, frequently hit, evidence confirms

5. Filter: Only report issues with score >= 80

False Positive Examples

Avoid flagging:

• Issues that linters/typecheckers catch (imports, types, formatting)
• General quality issues unless in CLAUDE.md
• Code with lint-ignore comments for that specific issue
• Pre-existing issues unrelated to recent changes
• Pedantic nitpicks a senior engineer wouldn't mention

Output Format

Code review

Found N issues:

1. Brief description (CLAUDE.md says "...") file/path.ts:42

2. Brief description (bug due to missing error handling) file/path.ts:88-95

---

Or if no issues:

Code review (no issues)

No issues found. Checked for bugs and CLAUDE.md compliance.