code-review

name: code-review description: Structured code review for PRs and local changes with parallel agent analysis. Use when asked to review code, check changes, audit a diff, or analyze code quality author: subinium user-invocable: true disable-model-invocation: true args: PR number or branch name (optional)

Code Review

Perform a structured code review. Supports local changes and GitHub PRs.

Instructions

If $ARGUMENTS is a PR number or URL:

1. Run gh pr diff $ARGUMENTS to get the diff
2. Run gh pr view $ARGUMENTS to get PR description and metadata
3. Run gh pr checks $ARGUMENTS to see CI status

If no arguments (local changes):

1. Run git diff --staged first. If empty, git diff. If empty, git diff HEAD~1.

Then for all cases:

2. Spawn parallel agents for efficiency:
   • Agent 1: Read all changed files in full for context
   • Agent 2: Run npm run lint / npm run test / npx tsc --noEmit (if applicable)
3. Review against the checklist below.
4. For PRs: draft GitHub review comments using gh api if requested.

Output Format

## Code Review: [PR title or branch name]

### CI Status
- Lint: PASS/FAIL | Tests: PASS/FAIL | Types: PASS/FAIL

### Critical (must fix before merge)
- **[file:line]** Description
  **Fix**: Suggested fix or approach

### Important (should fix)
- **[file:line]** Description
  **Fix**: Suggested fix or approach

### Suggestions (nice to have)
- **[file:line]** Description

### Summary
- **Files reviewed**: N
- **Issues found**: N critical, N important, N suggestions
- **Overall**: APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES / NEEDS DISCUSSION

/code-review vs /pr-review

Time Limits

• Small diff (<200 lines): Complete within 2 minutes
• Medium diff (200-1000 lines): Complete within 5 minutes
• Large diff (>1000 lines): Warn user about scope, focus on Critical/Important only, skip Suggestions

Constraints

• DO NOT modify, fix, or edit any code during the review process
• DO NOT commit any changes
• Only report findings and suggest fixes — never apply them

Checklist

Critical

• Security: SQL injection, XSS, command injection, path traversal
• Security: Hardcoded secrets, API keys, passwords
• Security: Missing authentication/authorization checks
• Data loss: Destructive operations without confirmation
• Data loss: Missing database migrations or backward compatibility
• Runtime errors: Null/undefined access, unhandled exceptions
• Breaking changes: Public API or contract changes without versioning

Important

• Type safety: Proper TypeScript types, no any
• Error handling: Meaningful error messages, proper error boundaries
• Tests: New functionality has tests, edge cases covered
• Performance: N+1 queries, unnecessary re-renders, large bundle imports
• API contracts: Breaking changes documented, backward compatible
• Accessibility: Semantic HTML, ARIA labels, keyboard navigation
• UX: Loading states, error states, empty states handled

Suggestions

• Code clarity: Naming, comments, complexity reduction
• DRY: Duplicated logic that could be extracted
• Patterns: Consistency with existing codebase patterns
• Documentation: Updated README, JSDoc for public APIs