Code Review Skill

Comprehensive code review using PAL MCP multi-model consensus. Reviews recent commits, staged changes, or branch comparisons with focus on security, quality, performance, and architecture.

Quick Start

# Review last 5 commits (default)
/sc:code-review

# Review staged changes
/sc:code-review --staged

# Compare feature branch against main
/sc:code-review --branch main

# Security-focused review
/sc:code-review commits=3 --focus security

# Post review as PR comment
/sc:code-review --branch main --post-pr

Behavioral Flow

1. Parse - Extract review mode, focus area, and commit range from arguments
2. Validate - Verify git state, branch existence, staged changes
3. Discover - List available models via mcp__pal__listmodels
4. Gather - Collect git diff, changed files, commit history
5. Categorize - Map changed files to review focus areas
6. Review - Run PAL MCP consensus with multi-model evaluation
7. Format - Present findings in GitHub PR comment style
8. Post - Optionally post to PR via gh CLI

Flags

Flag	Type	Default	Description
commits	int	5	Number of recent commits to review
--staged	bool	false	Review only staged changes
--branch	string	-	Compare current branch against target branch
--focus	string	full	Focus: security, performance, quality, architecture, full
--post-pr	bool	false	Post review as PR comment
--models	int	2	Number of models for consensus (2-5)

Review Modes

Modes are mutually exclusive:

Mode	Trigger	Git Command
Commits	Default or commits=N	git diff -U10 HEAD~N..HEAD
Staged	--staged	git diff -U10 --cached
Branch	--branch <target>	git diff -U10 origin/<target>...HEAD

Phase 1: Validate Git State

# Verify git repository
git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree

# Get current branch
git branch --show-current

Mode-specific validation:

• Commits: Check git rev-list --count HEAD >= N
• Staged: Check git diff --cached --name-only is non-empty
• Branch: Check git rev-parse --verify "origin/$TARGET" exists

Phase 2: Discover Models

Call mcp__pal__listmodels to get available models. Select top N by score, preferring different providers for diversity.

Selection criteria:

1. Sort by score descending
2. Pick from distinct providers when possible
3. Minimum 2 models for meaningful consensus

Phase 3: Gather Git Context

Collect for the selected review mode:

Data	Purpose
git diff -U10 ...	Full diff with extended context
git diff --stat ...	Change statistics
git log --oneline ...	Commit summaries
Changed file list	File categorization

Phase 4: Categorize Changed Files

Pattern	Category	Review Focus
*.py, *.ts, *.go, *.rs	Source Code	Security, SOLID, performance
tests/**, *_test.*	Test Code	Coverage, edge cases, assertions
*.yml, *.yaml, *.toml	Config	Security, correctness
*requirements*, *package*	Dependencies	Vulnerabilities, versions
Dockerfile*, docker-compose*	Infrastructure	Security, best practices
*.md, *.rst	Documentation	Accuracy, completeness

Skip binary files (note them but exclude from diff review).

Phase 5: Handle Large Diffs

If diff exceeds ~1000 lines:

1. Group files by category (source, tests, config, docs)
2. Review each group separately with PAL consensus
3. Synthesize findings into single report
4. Deduplicate overlapping issues

Phase 6: Run PAL MCP Consensus

Use mcp__pal__consensus with discovered models.

Consensus workflow:

• step 1: Your initial analysis with the diff
• step 2+: Each model responds with findings
• total_steps = number of models + 1

Review checklist by focus area:

Focus	Checks
security	Secrets, injection, auth, input validation, dependencies
performance	N+1 queries, complexity, caching, memory leaks
quality	SOLID, naming, error handling, types, dead code
architecture	Patterns, coupling, separation of concerns, testability
full	All of the above (default)

Fallback: If consensus fails, use mcp__pal__codereview for single-model review.

Phase 7: Format Output

## Code Review: Multi-Model Consensus

**Review Mode**: [Commits (last N) | Staged Changes | Branch vs TARGET]
**Files Reviewed**: N files
**Lines Changed**: +X / -Y

---

### Executive Summary
[2-3 sentence overview]

---

### Critical Issues
> Must be addressed before merge

- [ ] **[FILE:LINE]** - [Issue description]
  - **Category**: Security/Performance/Bug Risk
  - **Severity**: Critical
  - **Recommendation**: [Specific fix]

### High Priority
> Should be addressed

- [ ] **[FILE:LINE]** - [Issue description]
  - **Category**: [Category]
  - **Recommendation**: [Specific fix]

### Medium Priority
> Recommended improvements

- [ ] **[FILE:LINE]** - [Issue description]
  - **Recommendation**: [Suggestion]

### Low Priority / Suggestions
> Nice to have

- [ ] [Suggestion]

---

### Positive Observations
- [Good pattern observed]

---

### Review Summary

| Category | Rating | Notes |
|----------|--------|-------|
| Security | X/5 | [Brief note] |
| Code Quality | X/5 | [Brief note] |
| Performance | X/5 | [Brief note] |
| Architecture | X/5 | [Brief note] |
| Test Coverage | X/5 | [Brief note] |

**Overall Assessment**: [APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES / NEEDS DISCUSSION]

---

### Model Consensus

| Model | Key Findings |
|-------|--------------|
| [Model 1] | [Summary] |
| [Model 2] | [Summary] |

**Agreement Areas**: [Where models agreed]
**Divergent Views**: [Where models differed]

Phase 8: Post to PR (Optional)

If --post-pr and in PR context:

PR_NUMBER=$(gh pr view --json number -q .number 2>/dev/null)
gh pr comment $PR_NUMBER --body "<review output>"

MCP Integration

PAL MCP (Primary)

Tool	When	Purpose
mcp__pal__listmodels	Always	Discover available models
mcp__pal__consensus	Default	Multi-model code review consensus
mcp__pal__codereview	Fallback	Single-model code review
mcp__pal__challenge	Critical findings	Validate severity of critical issues

Rube MCP (Optional)

Tool	When	Purpose
mcp__rube__RUBE_SEARCH_TOOLS	--notify	Find notification tools
mcp__rube__RUBE_MULTI_EXECUTE_TOOL	--notify	Send review to Slack/Jira

Error Handling

Scenario	Action
Not a git repo	Exit with error
No commits in range	Adjust N to available commits
No staged changes	Error with hint to git add
Branch not found	Error with available branches
PAL MCP unavailable	Fall back to mcp__pal__codereview
No models available	Error — PAL MCP not configured

Tool Coordination

• Bash - Git operations, PR posting
• Read - Source file inspection for context
• Grep - Pattern search in changed files
• PAL MCP - Multi-model consensus review
• Rube MCP - External notifications