review
Review Skill
Purpose: Perform exhaustive code reviews using multi-agent analysis across 13+ specialized reviewer agents.
Review Context
Review target: ${ARGUMENTS}
Review Methodology
Phase 1: Setup and Context Gathering
-
Identify Review Target
- Determine if reviewing a PR, branch, or commit
- Gather basic information about the changes
-
Setup Work Environment
- Check if already on review branch
- If not, consider using git-worktree for isolated review
- Skill: git-worktree (if needed)
-
Initial Scan
- Get overview of changed files and lines
- Identify major areas of change
Phase 2: Parallel Agent Reviews (13+ Reviewers)
Launch specialized reviewer agents in parallel:
Architecture Reviewers:
- System Architecture Reviewer - Overall system design and boundaries
- Domain Model Reviewer - Business logic and data modeling
- API Design Reviewer - Endpoint design and contracts
Code Quality Reviewers: 4. Patterns & Practices Reviewer - Design patterns and best practices 5. Performance Reviewer - Efficiency and scalability considerations 6. Security Reviewer - Security vulnerabilities and best practices 7. Test Coverage Reviewer - Testing strategy and coverage
Language & Framework Reviewers: 8. Language-Specific Reviewer - Language idioms and conventions 9. Framework Reviewer - Framework-specific patterns and APIs
Integration & Operations Reviewers: 10. Integration Reviewer - External dependencies and APIs 11. Database Reviewer - Data modeling and query optimization 12. UI/UX Reviewer - User interface and experience considerations 13. DevOps & Observability Reviewer - Deployment, monitoring, logging
Phase 3: Analysis and Synthesis
-
Collect Agent Findings
- Gather reports from all reviewer agents
- Identify common themes and patterns
- Prioritize issues by severity and impact
-
Create Structured Review
- Categorize findings by type and priority
- Provide specific, actionable feedback
- Include code examples and suggestions
-
Generate Review Summary
- Overall assessment of code quality
- Key strengths and areas for improvement
- Recommendations for next steps
Phase 4: Report and Follow-up
-
Create Review Document
- Write comprehensive review report
- Include detailed findings with code references
- Suggest fixes and improvements
-
Present Findings
- Share review summary with user
- Highlight critical issues first
- Offer to help with specific fixes
-
Next Steps Options
- Fix issues identified in review
- Run additional validation tests
- Proceed with merge/approval process
Review Output
- Structured Review Document: Detailed analysis with categorized findings
- Priority Classification: P1 (Critical), P2 (Important), P3 (Nice-to-have)
- Actionable Recommendations: Specific fixes and improvements
- File Path References: Exact locations of issues (e.g.,
app/services/example.rb:42)
Severity Classification
P1 (Critical): Must fix before merging
- Security vulnerabilities
- Breaking API changes without migration
- Data loss risks
- Performance regressions > 50%
P2 (Important): Should fix soon
- Code quality issues affecting maintainability
- Missing error handling
- Incomplete test coverage
- Minor performance issues
P3 (Nice-to-have): Optional improvements
- Code style nitpicks
- Documentation improvements
- Test optimization
- Refactoring opportunities