| name | review-pr |
| description | Structured review of a Pointsy change before merge across correctness, security/tenant-isolation, accessibility, performance, and tests. Use before requesting review or merging. |
Review a change
Review the current diff (git diff main...HEAD) across these dimensions and
report findings grouped by severity (blocker / should-fix / nit). Verify claims
against the code — don't assume.
Dimensions
- Correctness — logic, edge cases (negatives, zero, concurrency), error
handling, optimistic-update rollback.
- Security & tenant isolation — every query scoped by session
familyId;
no familyId/personId trusted from client input; authz checks
(requireParent) present; no secret/PIN logged or sent to the client; inputs
Zod-validated; points mutations transactional.
- Data integrity — ledger append-only; balances derived; snapshots stored;
migrations additive and reviewed.
- Accessibility — semantic markup, labels, focus, ≥44px targets, 7:1
contrast, reduced motion. (Run
a11y-audit for changed screens.)
- UI was actually rendered & looked at — screenshots of each changed
screen in every state (signed-out vs known-device, empty vs populated,
light/dark) are attached; the result matches intent. Reasoning ≠ verifying.
- Visual polish — scrutinise those screenshots like a designer: no
crowding/cramping, things align, no info repeated that context already
shows, badges/chips are subtle (not loud uppercase pills), good hierarchy
and balance. "It renders" is not the bar — flag anything that looks "off".
- Auth/entry — no signed-in user or known device is shown marketing or a
sign-in form as home;
/ is the PIN-gated picker for them (AGENTS.md inv. 8).
- Performance — Server Components by default, no N+1 queries, cached reads.
- Tests — unit for domain, integration incl. isolation, e2e + axe; meaningful
assertions; coverage targets met.
- Conventions — CSS Modules + tokens, lucide icons, Conventional Commit,
changeset present.
End with a clear verdict: Approve, Approve with nits, or Request changes.
