Quick Code Review

Context

• Current branch: !git branch --show-current
• Git status: !git status --porcelain
• Base branch: !(git show-branch | grep '*' | grep -v "$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)" | head -1 | sed 's/.*\[\([^]]*\)\].*/\1/' | sed 's/\^.*//' 2>/dev/null) || echo "develop"
• Changes since base: !BASE=$(git merge-base HEAD develop 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null) && git log --oneline $BASE..HEAD
• Files changed since base: !BASE=$(git merge-base HEAD develop 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null) && git diff --name-only $BASE..HEAD
• Test commands available: !([ -f package.json ] && echo "npm/pnpm/yarn test") || ([ -f Cargo.toml ] && echo "cargo test") || ([ -f pyproject.toml ] && echo "pytest/uv run pytest") || ([ -f go.mod ] && echo "go test") || echo "no standard test framework detected"

Phase 1: Determine Review Scope

Goal: Identify what to review based on current state.

Actions:

1. Check review scope in this order:
   • Uncommitted changes: If git status shows modifications, review those files via git diff
   • Session changes: If files were modified during this conversation, review those
   • User argument: If $ARGUMENTS specifies files/directories, review those
   • No scope: If none of the above, use AskUserQuestion tool to ask user to specify files/directories to review
2. Record the determined scope for Phase 2.

Phase 2: Initial Assessment

Goal: Scope the review and determine which specialized agents are required.

Actions:

1. Explore changed code context using the Explore agent:
   • Launch subagent_type="Explore" with thoroughness: "quick"
   • Let the agent autonomously discover related code and dependencies
2. Run an initial assessment with @tech-lead-reviewer — architectural impact assessment — to gauge architectural, security, and UX risk.
3. Evaluate whether a deeper review is needed based on the tech-lead assessment.
4. Identify which specialized agents to involve (minimizing turnaround time).

Phase 3: Targeted Review

Goal: Gather targeted feedback from relevant specialized reviewers.

Actions:

1. Launch only the necessary specialized reviews via the Task tool:
   • @code-reviewer — logic correctness, tests, error handling.
   • @security-reviewer — authentication, data protection, validation.
   • @performance-reviewer — performance bottlenecks and resource usage (if performance-sensitive).
   • @test-coverage-reviewer — test coverage and quality (if tests are modified or missing).
   • @ux-reviewer — usability and accessibility (skip if purely backend/CLI).
2. Collect outcomes from each agent.
3. Resolve conflicting recommendations between reviewers.

Phase 4: Consolidation & Reporting

Goal: Present findings and optionally implement fixes.

Actions:

1. Organize findings using the priority/confidence matrix:
   • Priority: Critical → High → Medium → Low
   • Confidence: High → Medium → Low
2. Present a concise summary to the user.
3. Ask whether the user wants fixes implemented.
4. If confirmed:
   • Apply requested changes.
   • Refactor with @code-simplifier — code simplification and optimization.
   • Run tests to validate fixes.
   • Stage commits following Git commit conventions (see ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/references/git-commit-conventions.md).
5. Report outcomes and confirm review completion.

IMPORTANT: You MUST use the Task tool to complete ALL tasks.