| name | review |
| description | Run a structured code review on recent changes or specified files |
| user-invocable | true |
Perform a structured code review. If arguments are provided, review those files/paths. If no arguments, review recent uncommitted or staged changes.
Review Checklist
Work through each category and report findings.
1. Correctness
- Does the code do what it claims?
- Are edge cases handled?
- Are error paths meaningful (not swallowed or generic)?
- Are types accurate and strict (no unnecessary
any)?
2. Design Doc Compliance
Cross-reference changes against docs/dev/ (architecture.md, schema-reference.md, etc.):
- Does the data model match confirmed schema?
- Does CLI surface match the intended commands?
- Are MCP guardrails respected (structured tools for metadata, no direct frontmatter editing)?
- Are workflow values using config
keys not labels?
- Is the
.loctt/ directory structure correct?
Flag anything that contradicts a confirmed decision.
3. Clean Code (per .claude/housekeeping.md)
- No debug logging left behind
- No dead code or commented-out blocks
- Comments describe WHY not WHAT
- No quick fixes or workarounds
- No
any types without justification
- Named exports used
4. Impact Analysis
- What else in the codebase is affected by this change?
- Are there callers, tests, or docs that need updating?
- Any breaking changes to existing behavior?
5. Testing Gaps
- What's untested that should be?
- Are mocks limited to external dependencies only?
- Would existing tests catch a regression if this code broke?
Output Format
## Review: [files or scope]
### Correctness
- [findings]
### Design Doc Compliance
- [findings or "No issues"]
### Clean Code
- [findings]
### Impact
- [affected areas]
### Testing Gaps
- [what needs tests]
### Summary
[severity] [count] issues found
- Critical: [list]
- Suggestions: [list]
Arguments: $ARGUMENTS
