review

name	review
description	Critical review of recent changes for code quality, test coverage, DRY/SOLID, documentation, and architecture. Use after completing a feature.
disable-model-invocation	true
effort	max

Perform a thorough critical review of the changes made in this conversation. Be a strict reviewer — flag real problems, not nitpicks.

Review checklist

1. Feature correctness

Step back and evaluate whether the feature was implemented properly:

• Does the implementation actually solve the stated problem?
• Are there edge cases or failure modes that were missed?
• Could a simpler approach achieve the same result?

2. Code quality & maintainability

• Are functions focused and small (< 15 lines)?
• Are module boundaries clean — does each module have a single responsibility?
• Is error handling consistent and complete?
• Are there any code smells (long parameter lists, deep nesting, boolean parameters)?

3. DRY / SOLID principles

• Is there duplicated logic that should be extracted into a shared module?
• Are there opportunities to introduce abstractions that would make code reusable elsewhere?
• Do modules depend on abstractions (behaviours) rather than concrete implementations where appropriate?
• Is there dead code that should be removed?

4. Test coverage

• Are all new public context functions covered by unit tests?
• Are LiveView interactions tested (mount, events, navigation)?
• Are edge cases tested (not found, unauthorized, invalid input)?
• Are error paths tested, not just happy paths?
• Do tests verify side effects (e.g., blocked user actually loses access)?

5. Documentation

• Do all new public functions have @doc and @spec?
• Are @moduledoc descriptions up to date with the changes?
• Are non-obvious design decisions documented?

6. Architecture decisions

• If this change introduces a significant pattern, convention, or architectural decision, propose an ADR (Architecture Decision Record) in docs/adr/ following the project convention.

Output format

1. List issues found, grouped by category, with severity: critical / should fix / nice to have
2. For each issue, explain WHY it matters and suggest a concrete fix
3. After listing issues, fix all critical and should fix items
4. Run mix format, mix credo --strict, and mix test at the end to verify everything passes