requesting-code-review

name	requesting-code-review
description	Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements

Requesting Code Review

Dispatch the code-reviewer agent to catch issues before they cascade. The reviewer gets precisely crafted context for evaluation — never your session's history. This keeps the reviewer focused on the work product, not your thought process, and preserves your own context for continued work.

Core principle: Review early, review often.

When to Request Review

Scope guard:

• Use this skill from primary agents/orchestrators only.
• Do not invoke this skill from a subagent.
• If you are already the code-reviewer agent, perform the review directly.

Mandatory:

• After each task in subagent-driven development
• After completing major feature
• Before merge to main

Optional but valuable:

• When stuck (fresh perspective)
• Before refactoring (baseline check)
• After fixing complex bug

How to Request

1. Determine scope:

By default the reviewer inspects unstaged changes (git diff). For committed work specify the files or commit range explicitly.

2. Dispatch code-reviewer agent:

Use the Agent tool with subagent_type: "code-reviewer" and a prompt that includes:

• What was implemented and why
• Which files / scope to focus on (or "review unstaged changes")
• Any relevant requirements or constraints

3. Act on feedback:

• Fix Critical issues (confidence 90-100) immediately
• Fix Important issues (confidence 80-89) before proceeding
• Push back if reviewer is wrong (with reasoning)

Example

[Just completed Task 2: Add verification function]

You: Let me request code review before proceeding.

[Dispatch code-reviewer agent]
  Prompt:
    Review the unstaged changes in git diff.
    I just added verifyIndex() and repairIndex() functions to handle
    4 types of index corruption. Focus on correctness and error handling.

[Agent returns]:
  Issues:
    Important [85]: Missing progress indicators for long-running repair
    Critical [92]: repairIndex() swallows errors from writeFile()
  Assessment: Fix before proceeding

You: [Fix the issues]
[Continue to Task 3]

Integration with Workflows

Subagent-Driven Development:

• Review after EACH task
• Catch issues before they compound
• Fix before moving to next task

Executing Plans:

• Review after each batch (3 tasks)
• Get feedback, apply, continue

Ad-Hoc Development:

• Review before merge
• Review when stuck

Red Flags

Never:

• Skip review because "it's simple"
• Ignore Critical issues
• Proceed with unfixed Important issues
• Argue with valid technical feedback

If reviewer wrong:

• Push back with technical reasoning
• Show code/tests that prove it works
• Request clarification