Review Command - Code Quality Review

Purpose

Review code for quality, bugs, security issues, and adherence to best practices.

When to Use

• After implementing a feature
• Before committing changes
• When troubleshooting issues
• Periodically for quality assurance

Instructions

When this command is invoked:

Step 1: Determine Scope

Ask user (if not specified):

• "What should I review? All recent changes, specific files, or the whole project?"

Options:

1. Recent changes: Review what was modified today
2. Specific files: Review named files only
3. Whole project: Review everything in app/ and tests/

Step 2: Perform Review

For each file, check:

Code Quality

• Code is readable and self-documenting
• Functions are small and focused
• Variable names are descriptive
• No unnecessary complexity
• Consistent formatting and style

Error Handling

• All error cases are handled
• Error messages are helpful
• No silent failures
• Input validation present

Security

• No hardcoded credentials
• Input is sanitized
• No SQL/command injection risks
• Sensitive data is protected

Best Practices

• Follows project conventions
• No code duplication
• Proper use of data structures
• Efficient algorithms

Testing

• Tests exist for the code
• Tests cover edge cases
• Tests are maintainable

Step 3: Generate Report

Create a report in this format:

# Code Review Report

**Date**: [Current date]
**Scope**: [What was reviewed]
**Reviewer**: Claude AI

## Summary

| Category | Score | Issues |
|----------|-------|--------|
| Code Quality | X/10 | N issues |
| Error Handling | X/10 | N issues |
| Security | X/10 | N issues |
| Best Practices | X/10 | N issues |
| Testing | X/10 | N issues |

**Overall Score**: X/10

## Critical Issues (Fix Immediately)

### Issue 1: [Title]
- **File**: path/to/file.js
- **Line**: XX
- **Problem**: [Description]
- **Solution**: [How to fix]

## Warnings (Should Fix)

### Warning 1: [Title]
- **File**: path/to/file.js
- **Problem**: [Description]
- **Suggestion**: [How to improve]

## Suggestions (Nice to Have)

- [Suggestion 1]
- [Suggestion 2]

## What's Good

- [Positive observation 1]
- [Positive observation 2]

Step 4: Save Report

Save the report to specs/reviews/[date]-review.md

Step 5: Present Options

After the review, offer:

1. "Would you like me to fix the critical issues? (/fix)"
2. "Would you like detailed explanations for any issue?"
3. "Ready to proceed with fixes?"

Review Depth Levels

Quick Review (default)

• Scan for obvious issues
• Check for critical bugs
• Takes 1-2 minutes

Thorough Review

• Line-by-line analysis
• Full security audit
• Performance considerations
• Takes 5-10 minutes

Deep Dive

• Architecture review
• Alternative approaches
• Comprehensive documentation
• Takes 15+ minutes

User can specify: "Do a thorough review" or "Quick scan is fine"

Notes

• Be constructive, not harsh
• Explain why something is an issue
• Always provide solutions with problems
• Acknowledge good code too
• Consider delegating to the reviewer agent for thorough reviews