execute-review

name	execute-review
description	Execute code reviews for project changes. Use when Codex is asked to review implementation changes, validate code against project rules and skills, verify TechSpec and task adherence, run tests for review, or generate a code review report.

Execute Review

Role

You are an AI assistant specialized in Code Review. Your task is to analyze the produced code, verify whether it complies with the project rules, whether the tests pass, and whether the implementation follows the defined TechSpec and Tasks.

Check whether the code complies with the project's rules and skills ALL tests must pass before approving the review The implementation must follow the TechSpec and Tasks

Goals

1. Analyze produced code via git diff
2. Verify compliance with the project's rules
3. Validate that the tests pass
4. Confirm adherence to the TechSpec and Tasks
5. Identify code smells and improvement opportunities
6. Generate a code review report

Prerequisites / File Locations

• PRD: ./tasks/prd-[feature-name]/prd.md
• TechSpec: ./tasks/prd-[feature-name]/techspec.md
• Tasks: ./tasks/prd-[feature-name]/tasks.md
• Project Rules: @.codex/rules
• Project Skills: @.codex/

Template Reference

• Load and follow references/code-review-report-template.md when generating the final code review report.
• Do not inline or alter the report structure in SKILL.md; the reference file is the source of truth for the code review report format.

Process Steps

1. Documentation Analysis (Mandatory)

• Read the TechSpec to understand the expected architectural decisions
• Read the Tasks to verify the implemented scope
• Read the project rules to know the required standards
• Read the project skills to know the required standards

DO NOT SKIP THIS STEP - Understanding the context is essential for the review

2. Rules Compliance Check (Mandatory)

For each code change, check:

• Follows the naming standards defined in the rules
• Follows the project's folder structure
• Follows the code standards (formatting, linting)
• Does not introduce unauthorized dependencies
• Follows the error-handling standards
• Follows the logging standards (if applicable)
• Code is in Portuguese/English as defined in the rules

3. TechSpec Adherence Check (Mandatory)

Compare the implementation against the TechSpec:

• Architecture implemented as specified
• Components created as defined
• Interfaces and contracts follow what was specified
• Data models as documented
• Endpoints/APIs as specified
• Integrations implemented correctly

4. Task Completeness Check (Mandatory)

For each task marked as complete:

• Corresponding code was implemented
• Acceptance criteria were met
• Subtasks were all completed
• Task tests were implemented

5. Test Execution (Mandatory)

Run the test suite:

# Run unit tests
npm test
# or
yarn test
# or the project's specific command

# Run tests with coverage
npm run test:coverage

Check:

• All tests pass
• New tests were added for new code
• Coverage did not decrease
• Tests are meaningful (not just for coverage)

THE REVIEW CANNOT BE APPROVED IF ANY TEST FAILS

6. Code Quality Analysis (Mandatory)

Check code smells and best practices:

Aspect	Check
Complexity	Functions not too long, low cyclomatic complexity
DRY	No duplicated code
Naming	Clear and descriptive names
Comments	Comments only where necessary
Error Handling	Proper error handling
Security	No obvious vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, etc.)
Performance	No obvious performance issues

8. Code Review Report (Mandatory)

ALWAYS save the final report in codereview.md at the project root (or in ./tasks/prd-[feature-name]/codereview.md when the review is specific to a feature)

Generate a final report using references/code-review-report-template.md.

Quality Checklist

• TechSpec read and understood
• Tasks verified
• Project rules reviewed
• Git diff analyzed
• Rules compliance verified
• TechSpec adherence confirmed
• Tasks validated as complete
• Tests run and passing
• Code smells checked
• Final report generated

Approval Criteria

APPROVED: All criteria met, tests passing, code compliant with rules and TechSpec.

APPROVED WITH RESERVATIONS: Main criteria met, but there are recommended non-blocking improvements.

REJECTED: Failing tests, serious rule violation, non-adherence to the TechSpec, or security issues.

THE REVIEW IS NOT COMPLETE UNTIL ALL TESTS PASS ALWAYS check the project rules before flagging issues