review-pr

name	review-pr
description	Performs full PR review with blast-radius analysis and structured output. Use when reviewing a complete pull request, checking merge readiness, or assessing multi-commit changes against a base branch.

Review PR

Execution context: Cross-skill script paths use ../ relative references.

Full structural code review of a pull request or branch diff.

When to use this skill

User request → Which review skill?
├─ "review this PR" / "is this ready to merge?" → review-pr (this skill)
├─ "review this branch" + multiple commits → review-pr
├─ "check my changes" + last commit only → review-delta
├─ "did I break anything?" → review-delta
├─ code-review workflow escalated to HIGH → review-pr (called by workflow)
└─ code-review workflow at LOW/MEDIUM → review-delta (called by workflow)

• Reviewing a complete PR (multiple commits against base branch)
• Checking if a branch is safe to merge (go/no-go decision)
• Need blast-radius across ALL commits (not just last one)

For quick single-commit reviews → use [review-delta] instead.

How to use it

1. Identify the changes

git diff --name-only main...HEAD

2. Run blast-radius on ALL changed files

bash ../code-graph/scripts/blast-radius.sh $(git diff --name-only main...HEAD)

3. Review based on risk level

Follow the escalation pattern from [code-graph] skill:

• LOW → skim changed files
• MEDIUM → read changed + direct callers
• HIGH/CRITICAL → read entire blast radius + run hub detection

4. For each reviewed file, check

• Security: auth/validation removed? access control weakened?
• API contracts: public interfaces changed? breaking changes?
• Test coverage: changed functions have tests? new code untested?
• Dependencies: new imports? removed dependencies still used elsewhere?

5. Generate structured report

## PR Review: <title>

### Summary
<1-3 sentence overview>

### Risk Assessment
- **Overall risk**: Low / Medium / High / Critical
- **Blast radius**: X files, Y direct callers impacted
- **Test coverage**: N changed functions covered / M total

### File-by-File Review
#### <file_path>
- **Changes**: <what changed>
- **Impact**: <who depends on this>
- **Issues**: <bugs, concerns>

### Test Coverage Gaps
- <function> in <file> — no test coverage found

### Recommendations
1. <specific, actionable>
2. <specific, actionable>

Tips

• Focus on highest-impact files first (most dependents from blast radius)
• Check if renamed/moved functions updated all callers
• For large PRs (50+ files) → warn user review may be incomplete
• Run hub detection to see if changed files are architectural hotspots