combined-review-review

Converted from Claude Code command /review. Review and adapt: hooks and MCP tool IDs may need manual mapping for Codex.

Combined Code Review

Context

• Directory: !pwd
• Branch: !git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null || echo "detached HEAD"
• Has changes: !git status --porcelain 2>/dev/null | head -1 | grep -q . && echo "yes" || echo "no"

Step 0 — Read config

Check if config exists at .claude/combined-review.local.md. If it exists, read the language setting from YAML frontmatter.

If config doesn't exist, use default: language: system.

Language resolution:

• system → detect from CLAUDE.md (look for language hints like "Отвечай", "русский", etc.) or fall back to English
• en / ru / uk → use directly

Apply the resolved language to the final report output (Step 6). Agents work internally in English for accuracy; only the final report is translated.

Arguments

$ARGUMENTS

Finding format

CRITICAL: every finding MUST include file path and line number: path/to/File.kt:42.

Step 1 — Parse arguments

Split $ARGUMENTS into mode and options:

Mode (first argument or pair):

• Empty → current changes (uncommitted + staged)
• --base <branch> → current branch vs specified
• Number (123) → PR number
• Two branch-like arguments → diff of first relative to second (target is second)
  • feature/X feature/Y
  • feature/X to feature/Y
  • feature/X...feature/Y

Branch-like: contains /, or starts with feature/, fix/, release/, hotfix/, master, main, develop.

Options (after mode):

• +comments — add comment analysis
• +types — add type design analysis
• +simplify — add code simplification
• all — run all agents including optional

Step 2 — Gather diff and context

Based on mode:

PR:

gh pr view <number>
gh pr diff <number>

Branch diff: Try with origin/ first, then local:

git fetch origin <branch1> <branch2> 2>/dev/null
git log origin/<target>..origin/<source> --oneline
git diff origin/<target>...origin/<source>

Source = first argument, target = second.

Current changes:

git diff HEAD
git diff --cached

With --base: git diff <base>...HEAD

If diff is empty — report and stop.

Also gather:

• List of changed files
• CLAUDE.md content (root + changed directories)

Step 3 — CodeRabbit setup check

Before launching agents, check CodeRabbit availability:

which coderabbit 2>/dev/null

If not installed: Ask the user: "CodeRabbit CLI not installed. Install it? (Y/n)"

If yes:

curl -fsSL https://cli.coderabbit.ai/install.sh | sh

If no — skip CodeRabbit, continue with 4 agents.

If installed, check auth:

coderabbit auth status 2>&1 | head -3

If not authenticated: Tell the user: "CodeRabbit requires authentication. Run ! coderabbit auth login in the prompt to log in via browser." Skip CodeRabbit for this run, continue with 4 agents.

Step 4 — Launch agents

Launch 4 default agents in parallel + CodeRabbit (if available) + optional agents if requested.

Pass each agent a prompt whose first line is Language: <resolved> where <resolved> is the language from Step 0 (en, ru, or uk — never literal system; resolve system to one of the three before launching). After that line, pass: full diff, file list, CLAUDE.md content.

Example agent prompt skeleton:

Language: ru

<diff>
...
</diff>

Changed files:
...

CLAUDE.md:
...

Agent 1 — Code Reviewer

Launch the code-reviewer agent. It checks:

• CLAUDE.md compliance (with rule citations)
• Bugs: null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic errors
• Code quality: duplication, broken public APIs, SOLID violations

Agent 2 — Git Historian

Launch the git-historian agent. It checks:

• Recent git history and blame for changed files
• Reverted fixes, hot spots, parallel work conflicts
• Lost changes (someone's code removed without justification)

Agent 3 — Silent Failure Hunter

Launch the silent-failure-hunter agent. It checks:

• Empty catch blocks, broad catches
• Silent failures, swallowed errors
• Missing error context and user feedback
• Unjustified fallback behavior

Agent 4 — Test Analyzer

Launch the test-analyzer agent. It checks:

• Test coverage for new/changed business logic
• Missing error path tests
• Missing boundary condition tests
• Test quality (behavior vs implementation testing)

Agent 5 — CodeRabbit (if available)

CodeRabbit reviews the working tree against --base <target>. If the working tree is on a branch other than the source we're reviewing (PR mode or branch-diff mode where current branch ≠ source), run CodeRabbit inside a temp git worktree checked out to the source branch.

Determine which path to take:

• current mode (uncommitted changes) → run in cwd, no worktree, no --base.
• --base <X> mode → run in cwd with --base <X>. Current branch IS source.
• pr mode and branch-diff mode → if git branch --show-current differs from the source branch, use the worktree path. Otherwise run in cwd with --base <target>.

Worktree path (when needed):

Substitute <source> and <target> with the resolved branch names from Step 1.

WORKTREE=$(mktemp -d -t coderabbit-XXXXXX)
if git worktree add --detach "$WORKTREE" "origin/<source>" 2>&1; then
  ( cd "$WORKTREE" && coderabbit review --plain --base "origin/<target>" 2>&1 | tail -200 )
  git worktree remove --force "$WORKTREE" 2>/dev/null || true
else
  echo "CodeRabbit skipped: worktree creation failed for origin/<source>"
fi

In-cwd path (when current branch is the source):

coderabbit review --plain --base <target> 2>&1 | tail -200

Or, in current mode:

coderabbit review --plain 2>&1 | tail -200

If git worktree add fails or CodeRabbit aborts, do not fail the review — log the skip reason and continue with the 4 agents' output.

Optional agents (by request)

+comments — Comment Analyzer (Sonnet agent): Check comment accuracy vs actual code. Find: comments that don't match code, stale TODOs, comment rot. Only for changed files.

+types — Type Design Analyzer (Sonnet agent): For new/changed types: evaluate encapsulation, invariant expression, enforcement. Rate 1-10 per criterion.

+simplify — Code Simplifier (Sonnet agent): Find areas in diff that can be simplified without losing functionality. Provide concrete before/after suggestions.

Step 5 — Score and filter

Collect findings from all agents:

1. Deduplicate — if two agents found the same issue, keep one with highest confidence
2. Filter out confidence < 60
3. Scope check — for every finding, verify the cited file:line is in the diff (added or modified). Run grep on the saved diff file if unsure. If the line is not in the diff, drop the finding even if multiple agents reported it. Reading-for-context is fine; reporting-on-unchanged-code is not.
4. Race-condition sanity check — if any finding flags an init { launch { x = suspendRead() } } + later sync read pattern as Critical or Warning, demand the time-window estimate. If the finding doesn't quantify producer-time (typically ms for DataStore/prefs) vs consumer-time (the realistic user steps before x is read), downgrade severity or drop. Pattern-based race claims without timing are false positives.
5. Parallel-conflict sanity check — if a finding cites a parallel branch/commit as a conflict source, verify with git merge-base --is-ancestor <commit> origin/<target>. If the commit is already in target, drop the finding.

False positives (skip):

• Pre-existing issues (existed before this diff)
• Things linter/compiler/CI would catch
• Stylistic nitpicks not backed by CLAUDE.md
• Intentional functionality changes
• Generic advice without specifics ("add tests" without saying for what)
• Issues on lines not changed in this diff — verified by Scope check above. Common trap: an agent reads Foo.kt for context (because the diff calls into it) and then flags pre-existing patterns in Foo.kt itself. Drop these.
• Speculative race conditions — async-init + sync-read patterns without a quantified non-zero race window.
• Already-merged "parallel" conflicts — a referenced commit that's already an ancestor of target.

Step 6 — Final report

Before writing the report, do a last self-check on every Critical:

• Is the file:line actually in the saved diff? (grep it if unsure)
• For race-condition findings: is the time-window quantified, and is producer << consumer? If not, downgrade or drop.
• For parallel-work findings: did you confirm the referenced commit is NOT already in target?

A handful of well-grounded Critical findings is better than a long list with pattern-matched speculation. If after filtering only one Critical remains — that's fine, report just that one.

Agent findings already arrive in the resolved language (via the Language: prefix from Step 4). Write the report shell — section headers, summary line, recommendation order — in the same resolved language. Code snippets, file paths, identifier names, and CLI commands stay as-is.

## Code Review: [what was reviewed]

**Files:** N | **Lines:** +X / -Y | **Commits:** N

### Critical

1. `path/to/File.kt:42` — description [source: agent-name, confidence: N]
   > code or context

### Findings

1. `path/to/File.kt:100` — description [source: agent-name, confidence: N]

### Tests

1. `path/to/File.kt` — missing test for [scenario] [criticality: N/10]

### CodeRabbit

[Results deduplicated with agents. If CodeRabbit didn't run — omit this section.]

### Positive

- What's done well (2-3 points)

If no findings after filtering:

## Code Review: [what was reviewed]

No issues found. Checked: CLAUDE.md, bugs, git history, error handling, tests.

Do NOT post a comment to the PR automatically. Only output to the user.