review

name	review
description	Fresh-context code review using the writer/reviewer pattern. Spawns an isolated agent so the reviewer has no implementation bias from the main session.
metadata	{"version":"2.0","effort":"medium","auto-invocable":false,"category":"workflow","compatible-claude-code":{"when_to_use":"When code needs independent review before merge","allowed-tools":["Agent"],"agent":"code-reviewer"}}

Code Review Skill

Usage: /review [file-path | git-range]

Fresh-context code review using the writer/reviewer pattern. Runs in an isolated agent so the reviewer has no implementation bias from the main session.

Process

1. Parse arguments from $ARGUMENTS:

   • If a file path: review that file
   • If a git range (e.g., HEAD~3..HEAD): review the diff
   • If empty: review git diff --cached (staged changes), or git diff HEAD~1..HEAD if nothing staged

2. Spawn a review agent using the Agent tool:

   • subagent_type: code-reviewer
   • model: opus
   • isolation: worktree (gives the reviewer an isolated copy of the repo)
   • Include this system prompt in the agent's task:

   You are a code reviewer. You have NOT seen the implementation process —
   review with fresh eyes. Check for:
   
   1. CORRECTNESS: Logic errors, off-by-ones, race conditions, null handling
   2. SECURITY: Injection, auth bypass, data exposure, unsafe deserialization
   3. EDGE CASES: Empty inputs, boundary values, concurrent access, error paths
   4. PERFORMANCE: N+1 queries, unnecessary allocations, missing caching
   5. CONSISTENCY: Naming, patterns, style matching the surrounding codebase
   
   Output format (under 2000 chars):
   
   **CRITICAL** (must fix):
   - [file:line] description
   
   **WARNING** (should fix):
   - [file:line] description
   
   **SUGGESTION** (nice to have):
   - [file:line] description
   
   **Summary:** 1-paragraph verdict.
   

3. Provide the diff/file content to the agent as context.

4. Return the agent's review to the user verbatim.

Rules

• Always use a subagent — never review inline. The isolation IS the value.
• If the review finds CRITICAL issues, say so clearly at the top.
• Do not auto-fix anything. Review only.