| name | review-code |
| user-invocable | false |
| version | 1.0.1 |
| author | Gabriel Trabanco <gtrabanco@users.noreply.github.com> |
| license | MIT |
| description | Internal correctness + simplification review pass of the agentic-workflow review pack — composed in-turn by review-change and product-audit; not a menu entry. Checks correctness, error handling, duplication, dead code, and simplification opportunities against the project's own conventions. Findings only; never edits code.
|
Review Code (internal)
Composed by review-change / product-audit within their conversation — on any
agent, follow this file inline as the routed step. Findings only; never edits,
never refactors.
Scope
The diff or path/glob the caller passes; default the current change vs the
default branch. State the scope at the top of the returned table.
Checklist (evaluate EVERY item — none is optional; n/a must be stated)
✓ No logic errors on the changed paths (trace each modified function's inputs →
outputs, including boundary values)
✓ Every error path is handled — no swallowed exceptions, no empty catch, no
silently-ignored return codes
✓ No duplicated logic (a changed block does not re-implement an existing
helper — cite the existing one if it does)
✓ No dead code introduced (unused functions, params, imports, unreachable
branches)
✓ No leftover TODO/FIXME/HACK markers in the diff
✓ Naming and file conventions match the project's docs (read them first; cite
the convention violated)
✓ No new abstraction beyond what the SPEC requires (an interface/base class
with one implementation is a finding)
✓ No new dependency not justified in the SPEC
✓ Simplification: any changed block that can lose lines without losing
behavior (cite before/after)
✓ Edge cases the SPEC's dev scenarios name are actually handled in code, not
just in tests
Return exactly
REVIEW CODE — scope: <scope>
| # | Finding | Sev | Evidence | Suggested fix |
|---|---------|-----|----------|---------------|
| 1 | <what> | critical|major|minor | <file:line> | <smallest action> |
Checklist: <n> evaluated, <n> pass, <n> findings, <n> n/a (<which + why>)
Summary: <1-2 sentences>
Decision: PASS | FAIL
FAIL if any critical or major finding is open; PASS otherwise. Minor findings
never block — they route to the caller's triage step.
Done when
- Every checklist item was evaluated with evidence (file:line or command output)
or explicitly marked n/a with the reason.
- The fixed-format block above is returned — nothing more, nothing less — and
no code was changed.
