code-review

name	code-review
description	Perform a structured code review. Use when the user asks to review code, check a PR, audit a file, or validate an implementation against best practices.

Code Review Process

Step 1 — Understand Context

Read the code in full before commenting. Understand what it's trying to do.

Step 2 — Review Checklist

Correctness

• Does the logic do what the name/comment says?
• Are edge cases handled? (nulls, empty collections, off-by-one)
• Are errors caught and handled meaningfully? Design
• Is the abstraction appropriate — not too thin, not over-engineered?
• Are responsibilities clearly separated?
• Is there unnecessary coupling between modules? Readability
• Are names (variables, functions, classes) intention-revealing?
• Is the code self-documenting, or does it rely on stale comments?
• Is complex logic explained with a comment or broken into named steps? Security
• Are inputs validated/sanitized before use?
• Are secrets or credentials never hardcoded?
• Is authorization checked, not just authentication? Performance (flag only if clearly problematic)
• N+1 queries or obvious algorithmic inefficiencies?
• Unbounded loops or memory allocations?

Step 3 — Output Format

Group findings by severity:

• 🔴 Blocker — must fix before merge (bugs, security holes, data loss risk)
• 🟡 Suggestion — worth fixing, improves quality but not critical
• 🟢 Nit — minor style or naming preference, low priority For each finding: state the issue, why it matters, and suggest a fix. End with a summary: overall assessment and the 1-2 most important things to address.