code-review

name	code-review
description	Structured workflow for conducting thorough code reviews. Use when the user asks to review code, a PR, or specific files.

Skill: Code Review Workflow

Trigger

When the user asks to review code, a PR, or specific files.

Steps

Step 1: Understand Context

• Read the PR description or user's explanation
• Identify the type of change (feature, bug fix, refactor, test)
• Check which files are modified

Step 2: High-Level Review

• Does the change accomplish its stated goal?
• Is the approach appropriate for the problem?
• Are there simpler alternatives?
• Does it follow project architecture patterns?

Step 3: Security Review

• No hardcoded secrets or credentials
• No PII in logs or error messages
• Input validation on all external inputs
• Parameterized database queries
• Proper authentication/authorization checks
• No sensitive data in URLs or headers

Step 4: Code Quality Review

• Functions are single-responsibility and < 30 lines
• Naming is clear and consistent
• No code duplication
• Error handling is comprehensive
• Logging includes correlationId
• Import order follows conventions

Step 5: Testing Review

• Tests exist for new/changed code
• Success and error paths tested
• Edge cases covered
• Mocks are appropriate (not over-mocking)
• Test names are descriptive

Step 6: Performance Review

• No N+1 database queries
• Appropriate use of indexes
• No unnecessary data loading
• Caching where appropriate
• No memory leaks

Step 7: Provide Feedback

Use this format:

• 🔴 Critical: Must fix before merge
• 🟡 Suggestion: Should improve
• 🟢 Nitpick: Optional improvement
• 👍 Positive: Things done well

Completion

Review is complete with actionable feedback categorized by priority.