code-review

name	code-review
description	Review changes in Codex with a risk-first workflow: establish scope, inspect high-impact files first, identify regressions/security issues, and report findings by severity.
compatibility	Codex CLI with terminal access, git, tokenlean CLI (npm i -g tokenlean)

Code Review (Codex)

Review diffs with a risk-first approach.

Workflow

Scope -> Risk map -> Deep review -> Verify assumptions -> Output

1. Scope

tl diff                   # Staged/unstaged changes, token-efficient
tl diff <ref>             # Specific commit range
tl pr                     # For branch/PR review

2. Risk map

For each changed file:

tl parallel \
  "impact=tl impact <file>" \
  "symbols=tl symbols <file>" \
  "complexity=tl complexity <file>"

For files with high impact (many dependents):

tl exports <file>         # Was the public API changed?

3. Deep review

Read the actual diff. You already know:

• What changed (from step 1)
• What depends on it (from tl impact)
• The shape of the code (from tl symbols)
• Complexity hotspots (from tl complexity)

Use tl snippet <function> <file> to read specific changed functions rather than full files.

4. Verify assumptions

tl parallel "guard=tl guard" "test=tl run 'npm test'"

5. Output format

## Findings
- [severity] path:line - issue, impact, fix recommendation

## Open Questions
- Missing context needed for confidence

## Summary
- Overall risk and release recommendation

Severity: critical, warning, nit.

Tips

• Findings first, summary second.
• Avoid style-only feedback unless it affects maintainability or bugs.
• If no findings, explicitly state that and mention residual risk.
• For test files, skip tl impact (nothing depends on tests).
• If a file is under 150 lines, just read it directly.